The time where you could find new physics in your average lab is mostly over. We often need huge, one-in-all-mankind projects like the Large Hadron Collider, the Hubble telescope and various other huge, super-powerful or super-sensitive systems to make experimental progress. They're massively expensive and take forever to create so maybe once a decade there's a new source of data. Meanwhile there's a ton of professors looking to research something, what's cheap to do? Computer models. Computer simulations. Not that I'm saying we know everything, far from it. But there's what we know, what we don't know and just a very thin slice that we're actively experimenting on right now. And we have our best and brightest working at CERN etc. it's the rest that need to justify their existence.
How policies are designed is only one side of the coin. The other side is deciding what to create policies for.
And how they are designed strongly depends on the goals, you can't measure how well a policy works on a one-dimensional axis. For example you might say freedom is one value. Public health and safety is another. I do want the freedom to choose between a burger and a salad. I don't want the burger or the salad to kill me from food poisoning. Ultra-liberalists will just say the market will fix everything, give me freedom. Ultra-authoritarian might say ban the burger, just salad for you to improve public health. And most of us is somewhere in the middle where we want to choose ourselves, but by legally guaranteed minimum standards. And there could be other factors like the difference between informed risk and hidden risk, age limits to buy dangerous substances and so on.
I also think it's quite difficult to make solid evidence about public policy, humans don't act the same in the lab as in the real world and there's no control group for society-wide changes. As in, you might easily just move the debate to whether or not these results have any applicability in the real world or if they're just artifacts of the model and the way the experiment was conducted. I guess it'd work a little better for measurable things like car accident rates, but most laws regulating behavior between people will still be guesswork. This isn't medical research where you can just isolate one patient and see if the treatment works, it's actually much more complicated than that.
It's not exactly rocket science how this would work, same way you can't buy porn mags or go to strip clubs and just say you're over 18. Today there are tons of sites that will show hardcore porn to any teenager willing so say "suuuuuure I'm 18+". Like first time you go to brazzers.com:
This website contains age-restricted materials. If you are under the age of 18 years, or under the age of majority in the location from where you are accessing this website you do not have authorization or permission to enter this website or access any of its materials. If you are over the age of 18 years or over the age of majority in the location from where you are accessing this website by entering the website you hereby agree to comply with all the TERMS AND CONDITIONS. You also acknowledge and agree that you are not offended by nudity and explicit depictions of sexual activity. By clicking on the "Enter" button, and by entering this website you agree with all the above and certify under penalty of perjury that you are an adult.
Click enter and they'll show you porn. Previews, to make you sign up but more than enough for curious teenagers. And the warning is all just scary talk since minors can't enter contracts and nothing is "under penalty of perjury" unless defined in law, it's all to cover their own ass.
This law would say this isn't good enough for the UK. If you're a UK website you have to redirect them to a "robust age verification" like a credit card check before they get to see anything. If not, you can be fined. Though if this only applies to sites hosted in the UK and not sites abroad accessed from the UK I predict the amount of porn hosted in the UK to drop to 0% in a week. And if the UK wants to police the Internet, good luck with that.
Not only did he replace the users with a very small shell script, but the clients too. One more round to write manbots and he can partner to release The Sims: The Dating Simulator.
I think there might actually be a third option: Take responsibility, be a parent.
Sure, whatever. Just realize that your kid will have friends and the chance of all their parents being tech-savvy enough to block porn is slim to none. When they asked 16 year olds here how many looked at porn then 9 out of 10 boys, 3 out of 10 girls and average age the first time was 12 for boys, 14 for girls. The main problem seems to be they learn too much from porn before they learn anything in real life, leading to some rather unrealistic expectations and standards. It's not exactly a documentary...
I've always said it was a pyramid scheme. For early miners it was very easy to mine and each score was bigger, but the system relied upon ever more people buying into the scheme to create value.
It was very easy to mine, so it was also near worthless. Both those who started to churn away GPU time and the very first people to sell/trade things of real value for Bitcoins took a huge leap of faith that this wouldn't just flop and be worth absolutely nothing. I remember reading about it when it passed $1 in value and thinking this was just a fad that would be nothing more than a few nerds passing around pizza and beer money before it flopped, so I'd strongly disagree that it looked like a pyramid scheme you should get in early on. Sure, in hindsight it's easy to say I was wrong but I'd say they got 100:1 their money on a 100:1 chance to succeed.
And the essence of a pyramid scheme is that there's no bottom, it only exist as long as it grows by feeding new money in from the bottom. While those at the top make good money, I'd argue those at the bottom are mostly no longer speculators. They're people that for various reasons use Bitcoins to transfer funds around and they'll continue to do so regardless of whether it's valued at $100 or $1000. They're not dependent on recruiting a next generation to pay them for the pyramid to stand. It's like how the people at the top of a start-up that goes boom sit with tons of shares, that by itself doesn't make it a pyramid scheme.
Yeah... not to mention Star Trek was pushing the 60s standard pretty hard by having a black woman as a bridge officer and kissing the captain at one point. If you want to touch some social stigmas and not just be a Fast & Furious clone wouldn't this be right up Gene's alley? I mean sure the fans go ballistic over canon when Spock and Uhura make out, but what most people see are just one person with pointy ears kissing another without pointy ears. It's not like an interracial kiss is a big deal anymore. Hang-ups about gays are alive and well though.
The real solution, of course, is a proper versioning filesystem with a regularly scheduled snapshot - say, once a week, or once a day if you're extra paranoid. You can even cycle the snapshots if you want to cut disk usage down.
You more or less have this with Volume Shadow Copy but ransomware will AFAIK delete them. It only works if you have some other user (root, dedicated backup-user/agent) do it that the compromised user can't fuck up. Or if you could make the backup/snapshot then drop your own delete/write privileges so you need admin rights to restore them. Though full compromise is also a risk, but ransomware usually doesn't bother it'll just encrypt your user's files.
Well the Vulkan API is developed by Khronos+++. There's the generic Vulkan changes to Mesa by Intel. And there's the Vulkan driver for Intel chips by Intel.
The post refers to the latter two, they're both implementations with the first part making the API available to Mesa client. The other part makes sure it's actually accelerated on Intel chips.
Well, what do you expect when you're not winning the apps?
Microsoft Office/Exchange is still huge in the office. DirectX-only games like Overwatch make a killing. Professional tools like Adobe CC don't support Linux.
Gnome, KDE etc. aren't going to make or break the Linux desktop though from all the drama you'd think so. I'd settle for an interface roughly like Win95 if only it ran the applications I needed. The rest would just be bonus. And we'll see now that Android apps runs on ChromeOS. It looks very impressive and might give Windows a run for the money.
There are major perceived racial issues and conflicts at hand, and you want to focus on the specific equipment at hand? This was not an autonomous killing machine. It was similar to an RC car with an explosive charge attached to it.
Well this is/. and the tech angle would be the part that's "news for nerds" so yeah. Basically it's about the possibility of using advanced civilian equipment like say drones and robots and convert it into ad-hoc weaponry. All you need to do is some explosives and jury rig an innocent output like "turn on searchlight" to detonate and you have a bomb. Now maybe this robot is just a dumb RC vehicle, but long term you can easily see a "search & rescue" bot be rigged as a "search & destroy" bot. Or "search & spot" for a laser guided bomb/missile. I see a lot of people who think we'll be able to build smart bots without building terminators but so much of the technology is exactly the same. It's not pulling the trigger that is the hard part.
The last day I showed up to work, I was thrown under the bus by the manager in front of our VP and the rest of the team for a lie to cover up the manager's incompetence. I went home, got up the next day, went to my doctor for a note to get the rest of the week off, and marched in on the following Monday to the reception desk with a letter of resignation and dropping off all of the company equipment. Didn't even talk to my manager, and didn't answer any of the manager's phone calls or e-mails, nor anyone else on the team after the day I got thrown under the bus. I, quite literally, disappeared. Why did I quit like this, especially without another source of income or health care coverage? Because leaving a gaping hole with a giant question mark in my wake was the only bit of power I had left to send a message for all of the misrepresentation, incompetence, unreasonable expectations and malice of the team that I had experienced.
In other words, nobody even really knows your side of the story. Did you win the lottery, have a mental breakdown, rage quit, are you a special snowflake whose feelings got hurt, what? Even if they do blame it on the job for the boss that's already willing to throw you under the bus this is the "I told you so" moment, I already warned you he was a poor worker and now he's disappeared. You can be sure that when the stories are to be told you're the scapegoat for all the group's ills. If I was really willing to burn that many bridges, I'd throw a firecracker in there by listing my grievances and emailing it to the relevant people, like telling the VP that you were thrown under the bus. Unanswered questions just leave skilled manipulators the freedom to shape the answers that are best for them.
I haven't met 1 person yet who got to choose their skin color when they came out of the pussy hole. How in the fuck can something so miniscule matter so much??
Then I'm sure your head would explode trying to understand caste systems, nobility or royalty. Why can't people say Earth is their birthplace and go live in the US, did you choose what country to come out of the pussy hole? Why shouldn't the inheritance tax be 100%, did you choose to be the child of a billionaire or a penniless vagrant? I think the gist of it was nicely summed up in "Selma", even though it's not MLKs actual speech since they're copyrighted:
"Our society has distorted who we are, from slavery to the reconstruction, to the precipice at which we now stand. We have seen powerful white men rule the world while offering poor white men a vicious lie as placation" - The fictionalized Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in the 2014 Movie "Selma"
"And when the poor white manâ(TM)s children wail with a hunger that cannot be satisfied, he feeds them that same vicious lie. A lie whispering to them that regardless of their lot in life, they can at least be triumphant in the knowledge that their whiteness makes them superior to blackness."
People like to feel superior. Right color, right faith, right country, right socioeconomic standing, as long as you're on the upside of the scale it feels good. Who doesn't want to "rig the lottery" for their children? If the child of a lord is a lord your children's position is secured. It is the same in the modern world and the Ivy League, "good old boys" club and so on. The rich and powerful pat each other on the back and help each other to stay rich and powerful. There will be a few "rags to riches" stories but they're exceptions to the norm and you'll often see old money looking down on new money too.
If you have the authority/permission to have that kind of overhead, sure. But it means people need to cross-train, they have to take out of their day to supervise and learn other jobs and keep documentation current. Very often budget issues and deadlines means you get backed into a corner where you need everyone to do what they're best at and focus on getting it done and improvise if necessary. And it's usually at the end of those crunch times that people quit and things are left in disarray. So I've written something that's not really documentation, it borders on meta-documentation describing more the overall process so you can find the actual code and jobs running which made it a lot smaller and a lot more stable. Because I've found that top level is often overlooked, there is information on how to do it if you already knew what you were looking for. But very often you're at a loss for where to start looking.
I had an issue with being double-charged for an app from the app store about 5 years ago. Went to Apple's support site, wrote a description of the problem, then was asked if I would like THEM to call ME. Not the other way around. Clicked yes, a calendar popped up in which I selected the time window in (IIRC) 10 minute increments when I wanted them to call me.
Tech support is usually okay when you've managed to get them to accept/verify that the problem is on their end and not just user error or something else they're doing or not really an error at all. Like in this case, they don't have to take your word for it - they can go into their billing system and see for themselves. The next best thing is screenshots, logs, photos, anything concrete. Because if I imagine a tech support call to myself, well I wouldn't take my word for what I was saying...
Ever since the consoles switched to AMD and basically became PCs in drag you've seen the number of exclusives (single console exclusive, console-only exclusive) go drastically down. If you look at some big name games:
The Witcher 3 - PC, XBone and PS4 Fallout 4 - PC, XBone and PS4 Dark Souls 3 - PC, XBone and PS4 Overwatch - PC, XBone and PS4
Are there exceptions? Sure: Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - PS4 Halo 5: Guardians - XBone
But I'd say most of them use some kind of scalable engine in the bottom, XBone or Scorpio is just like two PC users with different graphics card - which you were most likely planning for anyway. Maybe you have to make multiple versions of some effects, but the "none/low/medium/high/ultra" settings often do that today. Technically this isn't a big deal, really it's not.
Why do people think self driving cars will catch on? If anything, they will be more complex with even more sensors and systems needed to operate safely. If typical families already can't afford new cars, why would they be able to afford even more complex and expensive cars? The genius of Henry Ford wasn't building the best and most sophisticated car, but finding a way to lower production costs and make them affordable.
Goods transport, people transport, older kids, elderly and others with medical conditions that prevent them from holding a license, I think. We know there's a lot of elderly that either have voluntarily or involuntarily given up driving, should give up driving and they know it or they're in denial but that I think would be quite happy to not drive. Many have been forced to leave their homes and get an apartment because without a car public transport is too rare and too hard to use and taxis too expensive in the long run. And if they do get someone in the family to pick them up and drop them off that's time spent for them. Maybe if all the members of the household are driving age and license holders it's not such a big deal and small kids you can't just have running around by themselves but it's still many.
Personally I'm not sure how high the cost is going to be long-term anyway, sure there's sensors but ours aren't that fantastic. The rest is figuring out what the heck any of it means, but that's mainly a software challenge. If they can make a car that drives "correct" - or at least correct-ish enough and the only fault is a lack of sensor and processing capability that's a huge step. And that software you'll write once and can put in a billion cars, that's a lot of volume to spread it across. LIDAR is expensive today but we got may companies claiming it can be done much cheaper, there's optical + radar and really many possible variations and combinations for different needs, ranges and conditions. Pretty sure some of those will work out at reasonable cost.
None of which affect the game, it's just poses and voice lines and whatnot. But people quitting early = not pulling your friends along to play it too. passing recommendations etc. as well. I think that's a much bigger deal than the micro-transactions.
The problem is the cuts are usually generic and don't target the real waste and simply usually say, here take a 2%, 5%, 10% cut across the board while wasteful practices aren't targeted or touched. e.g. spending surplus budget before EOFY as they know if they don't they might get less the next FY, I see this every year, sometimes the waste is in the millions where they will buy services, hardware and software that never get used or touched just to ensure they don't have surplus.
A lot of it is dysfunction to combat dysfunction because if any process is delayed you can't say the $100k we budgeted for servers this year we'll need in February next year. Those money will go away and because you overbudgeted last year, we'll actually not just cut the $100k but we'll give you $150k less and you'll be stuck with extra old out of support servers because there was a delay in procurement. Sure, every company has to replan their portfolio and cancel projects sometimes. But they don't go nuclear every year and make every project and every department start over the allocation process.
The theory is of course that all the money will go back in a big pool and be spent where they're most needed. The reality is that when you've finally got approval to do something in one budget process, then no matter what you'd rather spend it than taking that fight all over again. I actually think you'd see much less waste in practice if you could get a spillover-account where you could have at most 10% of the budget but it's still "yours", sure more money would be stuck down in the system but it wouldn't accumulate and you could flex schedules more. It's the "use it or lose it" process that is the real problem.
This is the ULA trying to pretend they can be visionaries like Elon Musk too. The difference is that Elon actually works towards their goals, ULA is just rehashing fantasy that people have dreamed of ever since the 60s. Nobody is seriously working on asteroid mining technology, at best we have a few sample return missions that don't do refinement, don't do anything at scale and don't plan to return it in any way that would be commercially viable. In short it's a science mission and not a prelude to anything industrial, even a proof of concept that you could do it at all is at least a decade away and I don't see the ULA funding any of it.
And any off world production on the Moon or Mars is only going to be cheap compared to bringing the return fuel with you, sure you can pretend fuel on the ground will cost the same and that launch costs scale with gravity and come up with a fantasy number but nothing that passes the giggle test. Particularly if we soon have low-cost used rockets that can blast fuel packets most of the way into LEO then return for landing with a modest success rate. It's exactly the sort of thing you don't need 100% for.
Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.
Without religion there's a good chance they'd make some kind of peace and get over it. Like Germany started a few world wars but now 70 years later it's pretty much all history. The conflicts that last centuries where one people hates the other usually involve religion, because shit like that is the main reason to hate persons that never did anything to you personally. Maybe my ancestors did some bad shit to your ancestors but inherited sin is bullshit. In Christianity and in general.
When examining whether a business is, or can become, profitable - you can't just look at expenses. You have to look at the income side too. The submitter, and the linked articles, signally fail to do so.
With physical goods the price will rise with general costs to maintain a margin because consumers have to buy their groceries somewhere. For digital music consumers could always go back to piracy, I'm pretty sure the digital music companies have already found the sweet spot for what people will pay for convenience.
Noting depends on systemd. Nothing depends on a specific init system. Software may depend on specific APIs that expose certain kernel features like cgroups, so if you're not happy with having systemd do that then either write your own interface or pay someone to write it for you.
That's roughly as useful as saying software doesn't require Windows or Mac or Linux, just their APIs. Sure you have things like WINE but it only exists through tons of effort and still only works half the time.
The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism. Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job. It could happen - right?
Just to put this in perspective for US citizens, this is like saying you should be able to move from Silicon Valley to Montana and get an equivalent job. That people from Texas and Chicago and New York are taking the jobs that "belong to" Californians. Because those jobs would always be there, it's only a matter of who fills the position.
If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.
Sure, protectionism can protect the domestic market but it won't stop other countries from getting their stuff from China and India. And once you start putting up the fences it works both ways, your trade partners will start protecting their markets from you as well. Eventually you end up with an economy that only sells to itself which will end up like the Soviet Union.
Trade barriers won't let you turn back time to the "good old days" when your products were the envy of the world. When the competition gets tough, you can either adapt to compete or you can withdraw from the world market. Not not compete with China and India is not the same as going back to a time before China and India were competitors.
How is this autopilot legal? It sounds like one of the most dangerous devices created, inviting distracted driving. Cell phones are banned in many states for causing distracted driving, how is this not treated the same?
Semi-automated cars aren't distracting the driver, they just reduce the burden of driving just like automatic transmissions, ABS brakes, automatic windshield wipers, cruise control, intelligent cruise control, lane keeping etc. and so far nobody has said that it is too much of a good thing.
Google has taken the high road of "we'll release it when it's ready to drive itself not before" while Tesla has taken the low road of jus rolling it out and I'm sure they know this would happen. They're just hoping the legalese that the people are still technically driving will allow them to create the self-driving car incrementally. Will they be slapped down by courts and lawsuits? Time will tell, but I don't think there's any legislation in the works right now to make what Tesla does illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
The time where you could find new physics in your average lab is mostly over. We often need huge, one-in-all-mankind projects like the Large Hadron Collider, the Hubble telescope and various other huge, super-powerful or super-sensitive systems to make experimental progress. They're massively expensive and take forever to create so maybe once a decade there's a new source of data. Meanwhile there's a ton of professors looking to research something, what's cheap to do? Computer models. Computer simulations. Not that I'm saying we know everything, far from it. But there's what we know, what we don't know and just a very thin slice that we're actively experimenting on right now. And we have our best and brightest working at CERN etc. it's the rest that need to justify their existence.
How policies are designed is only one side of the coin. The other side is deciding what to create policies for.
And how they are designed strongly depends on the goals, you can't measure how well a policy works on a one-dimensional axis. For example you might say freedom is one value. Public health and safety is another. I do want the freedom to choose between a burger and a salad. I don't want the burger or the salad to kill me from food poisoning. Ultra-liberalists will just say the market will fix everything, give me freedom. Ultra-authoritarian might say ban the burger, just salad for you to improve public health. And most of us is somewhere in the middle where we want to choose ourselves, but by legally guaranteed minimum standards. And there could be other factors like the difference between informed risk and hidden risk, age limits to buy dangerous substances and so on.
I also think it's quite difficult to make solid evidence about public policy, humans don't act the same in the lab as in the real world and there's no control group for society-wide changes. As in, you might easily just move the debate to whether or not these results have any applicability in the real world or if they're just artifacts of the model and the way the experiment was conducted. I guess it'd work a little better for measurable things like car accident rates, but most laws regulating behavior between people will still be guesswork. This isn't medical research where you can just isolate one patient and see if the treatment works, it's actually much more complicated than that.
It's not exactly rocket science how this would work, same way you can't buy porn mags or go to strip clubs and just say you're over 18. Today there are tons of sites that will show hardcore porn to any teenager willing so say "suuuuuure I'm 18+". Like first time you go to brazzers.com:
This website contains age-restricted materials. If you are under the age of 18 years, or under the age of majority in the location from where you are accessing this website you do not have authorization or permission to enter this website or access any of its materials. If you are over the age of 18 years or over the age of majority in the location from where you are accessing this website by entering the website you hereby agree to comply with all the TERMS AND CONDITIONS. You also acknowledge and agree that you are not offended by nudity and explicit depictions of sexual activity. By clicking on the "Enter" button, and by entering this website you agree with all the above and certify under penalty of perjury that you are an adult.
Click enter and they'll show you porn. Previews, to make you sign up but more than enough for curious teenagers. And the warning is all just scary talk since minors can't enter contracts and nothing is "under penalty of perjury" unless defined in law, it's all to cover their own ass.
This law would say this isn't good enough for the UK. If you're a UK website you have to redirect them to a "robust age verification" like a credit card check before they get to see anything. If not, you can be fined. Though if this only applies to sites hosted in the UK and not sites abroad accessed from the UK I predict the amount of porn hosted in the UK to drop to 0% in a week. And if the UK wants to police the Internet, good luck with that.
Not only did he replace the users with a very small shell script, but the clients too. One more round to write manbots and he can partner to release The Sims: The Dating Simulator.
I think there might actually be a third option: Take responsibility, be a parent.
Sure, whatever. Just realize that your kid will have friends and the chance of all their parents being tech-savvy enough to block porn is slim to none. When they asked 16 year olds here how many looked at porn then 9 out of 10 boys, 3 out of 10 girls and average age the first time was 12 for boys, 14 for girls. The main problem seems to be they learn too much from porn before they learn anything in real life, leading to some rather unrealistic expectations and standards. It's not exactly a documentary...
I've always said it was a pyramid scheme. For early miners it was very easy to mine and each score was bigger, but the system relied upon ever more people buying into the scheme to create value.
It was very easy to mine, so it was also near worthless. Both those who started to churn away GPU time and the very first people to sell/trade things of real value for Bitcoins took a huge leap of faith that this wouldn't just flop and be worth absolutely nothing. I remember reading about it when it passed $1 in value and thinking this was just a fad that would be nothing more than a few nerds passing around pizza and beer money before it flopped, so I'd strongly disagree that it looked like a pyramid scheme you should get in early on. Sure, in hindsight it's easy to say I was wrong but I'd say they got 100:1 their money on a 100:1 chance to succeed.
And the essence of a pyramid scheme is that there's no bottom, it only exist as long as it grows by feeding new money in from the bottom. While those at the top make good money, I'd argue those at the bottom are mostly no longer speculators. They're people that for various reasons use Bitcoins to transfer funds around and they'll continue to do so regardless of whether it's valued at $100 or $1000. They're not dependent on recruiting a next generation to pay them for the pyramid to stand. It's like how the people at the top of a start-up that goes boom sit with tons of shares, that by itself doesn't make it a pyramid scheme.
Yeah... not to mention Star Trek was pushing the 60s standard pretty hard by having a black woman as a bridge officer and kissing the captain at one point. If you want to touch some social stigmas and not just be a Fast & Furious clone wouldn't this be right up Gene's alley? I mean sure the fans go ballistic over canon when Spock and Uhura make out, but what most people see are just one person with pointy ears kissing another without pointy ears. It's not like an interracial kiss is a big deal anymore. Hang-ups about gays are alive and well though.
The real solution, of course, is a proper versioning filesystem with a regularly scheduled snapshot - say, once a week, or once a day if you're extra paranoid. You can even cycle the snapshots if you want to cut disk usage down.
You more or less have this with Volume Shadow Copy but ransomware will AFAIK delete them. It only works if you have some other user (root, dedicated backup-user/agent) do it that the compromised user can't fuck up. Or if you could make the backup/snapshot then drop your own delete/write privileges so you need admin rights to restore them. Though full compromise is also a risk, but ransomware usually doesn't bother it'll just encrypt your user's files.
WTF is Intel Vulkan? Is it anything like Vulkan?
Well the Vulkan API is developed by Khronos+++.
There's the generic Vulkan changes to Mesa by Intel.
And there's the Vulkan driver for Intel chips by Intel.
The post refers to the latter two, they're both implementations with the first part making the API available to Mesa client. The other part makes sure it's actually accelerated on Intel chips.
Well, what do you expect when you're not winning the apps?
Microsoft Office/Exchange is still huge in the office.
DirectX-only games like Overwatch make a killing.
Professional tools like Adobe CC don't support Linux.
Gnome, KDE etc. aren't going to make or break the Linux desktop though from all the drama you'd think so. I'd settle for an interface roughly like Win95 if only it ran the applications I needed. The rest would just be bonus. And we'll see now that Android apps runs on ChromeOS. It looks very impressive and might give Windows a run for the money.
There are major perceived racial issues and conflicts at hand, and you want to focus on the specific equipment at hand? This was not an autonomous killing machine. It was similar to an RC car with an explosive charge attached to it.
Well this is /. and the tech angle would be the part that's "news for nerds" so yeah. Basically it's about the possibility of using advanced civilian equipment like say drones and robots and convert it into ad-hoc weaponry. All you need to do is some explosives and jury rig an innocent output like "turn on searchlight" to detonate and you have a bomb. Now maybe this robot is just a dumb RC vehicle, but long term you can easily see a "search & rescue" bot be rigged as a "search & destroy" bot. Or "search & spot" for a laser guided bomb/missile. I see a lot of people who think we'll be able to build smart bots without building terminators but so much of the technology is exactly the same. It's not pulling the trigger that is the hard part.
The last day I showed up to work, I was thrown under the bus by the manager in front of our VP and the rest of the team for a lie to cover up the manager's incompetence. I went home, got up the next day, went to my doctor for a note to get the rest of the week off, and marched in on the following Monday to the reception desk with a letter of resignation and dropping off all of the company equipment. Didn't even talk to my manager, and didn't answer any of the manager's phone calls or e-mails, nor anyone else on the team after the day I got thrown under the bus. I, quite literally, disappeared. Why did I quit like this, especially without another source of income or health care coverage? Because leaving a gaping hole with a giant question mark in my wake was the only bit of power I had left to send a message for all of the misrepresentation, incompetence, unreasonable expectations and malice of the team that I had experienced .
In other words, nobody even really knows your side of the story. Did you win the lottery, have a mental breakdown, rage quit, are you a special snowflake whose feelings got hurt, what? Even if they do blame it on the job for the boss that's already willing to throw you under the bus this is the "I told you so" moment, I already warned you he was a poor worker and now he's disappeared. You can be sure that when the stories are to be told you're the scapegoat for all the group's ills. If I was really willing to burn that many bridges, I'd throw a firecracker in there by listing my grievances and emailing it to the relevant people, like telling the VP that you were thrown under the bus. Unanswered questions just leave skilled manipulators the freedom to shape the answers that are best for them.
I haven't met 1 person yet who got to choose their skin color when they came out of the pussy hole. How in the fuck can something so miniscule matter so much??
Then I'm sure your head would explode trying to understand caste systems, nobility or royalty. Why can't people say Earth is their birthplace and go live in the US, did you choose what country to come out of the pussy hole? Why shouldn't the inheritance tax be 100%, did you choose to be the child of a billionaire or a penniless vagrant? I think the gist of it was nicely summed up in "Selma", even though it's not MLKs actual speech since they're copyrighted:
"Our society has distorted who we are, from slavery to the reconstruction, to the precipice at which we now stand. We have seen powerful white men rule the world while offering poor white men a vicious lie as placation" - The fictionalized Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in the 2014 Movie "Selma"
"And when the poor white manâ(TM)s children wail with a hunger that cannot be satisfied, he feeds them that same vicious lie. A lie whispering to them that regardless of their lot in life, they can at least be triumphant in the knowledge that their whiteness makes them superior to blackness."
People like to feel superior. Right color, right faith, right country, right socioeconomic standing, as long as you're on the upside of the scale it feels good. Who doesn't want to "rig the lottery" for their children? If the child of a lord is a lord your children's position is secured. It is the same in the modern world and the Ivy League, "good old boys" club and so on. The rich and powerful pat each other on the back and help each other to stay rich and powerful. There will be a few "rags to riches" stories but they're exceptions to the norm and you'll often see old money looking down on new money too.
If you have the authority/permission to have that kind of overhead, sure. But it means people need to cross-train, they have to take out of their day to supervise and learn other jobs and keep documentation current. Very often budget issues and deadlines means you get backed into a corner where you need everyone to do what they're best at and focus on getting it done and improvise if necessary. And it's usually at the end of those crunch times that people quit and things are left in disarray. So I've written something that's not really documentation, it borders on meta-documentation describing more the overall process so you can find the actual code and jobs running which made it a lot smaller and a lot more stable. Because I've found that top level is often overlooked, there is information on how to do it if you already knew what you were looking for. But very often you're at a loss for where to start looking.
I had an issue with being double-charged for an app from the app store about 5 years ago. Went to Apple's support site, wrote a description of the problem, then was asked if I would like THEM to call ME. Not the other way around. Clicked yes, a calendar popped up in which I selected the time window in (IIRC) 10 minute increments when I wanted them to call me.
Tech support is usually okay when you've managed to get them to accept/verify that the problem is on their end and not just user error or something else they're doing or not really an error at all. Like in this case, they don't have to take your word for it - they can go into their billing system and see for themselves. The next best thing is screenshots, logs, photos, anything concrete. Because if I imagine a tech support call to myself, well I wouldn't take my word for what I was saying...
Ever since the consoles switched to AMD and basically became PCs in drag you've seen the number of exclusives (single console exclusive, console-only exclusive) go drastically down. If you look at some big name games:
The Witcher 3 - PC, XBone and PS4
Fallout 4 - PC, XBone and PS4
Dark Souls 3 - PC, XBone and PS4
Overwatch - PC, XBone and PS4
Are there exceptions? Sure:
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - PS4
Halo 5: Guardians - XBone
But I'd say most of them use some kind of scalable engine in the bottom, XBone or Scorpio is just like two PC users with different graphics card - which you were most likely planning for anyway. Maybe you have to make multiple versions of some effects, but the "none/low/medium/high/ultra" settings often do that today. Technically this isn't a big deal, really it's not.
Why do people think self driving cars will catch on? If anything, they will be more complex with even more sensors and systems needed to operate safely. If typical families already can't afford new cars, why would they be able to afford even more complex and expensive cars? The genius of Henry Ford wasn't building the best and most sophisticated car, but finding a way to lower production costs and make them affordable.
Goods transport, people transport, older kids, elderly and others with medical conditions that prevent them from holding a license, I think. We know there's a lot of elderly that either have voluntarily or involuntarily given up driving, should give up driving and they know it or they're in denial but that I think would be quite happy to not drive. Many have been forced to leave their homes and get an apartment because without a car public transport is too rare and too hard to use and taxis too expensive in the long run. And if they do get someone in the family to pick them up and drop them off that's time spent for them. Maybe if all the members of the household are driving age and license holders it's not such a big deal and small kids you can't just have running around by themselves but it's still many.
Personally I'm not sure how high the cost is going to be long-term anyway, sure there's sensors but ours aren't that fantastic. The rest is figuring out what the heck any of it means, but that's mainly a software challenge. If they can make a car that drives "correct" - or at least correct-ish enough and the only fault is a lack of sensor and processing capability that's a huge step. And that software you'll write once and can put in a billion cars, that's a lot of volume to spread it across. LIDAR is expensive today but we got may companies claiming it can be done much cheaper, there's optical + radar and really many possible variations and combinations for different needs, ranges and conditions. Pretty sure some of those will work out at reasonable cost.
None of which affect the game, it's just poses and voice lines and whatnot. But people quitting early = not pulling your friends along to play it too. passing recommendations etc. as well. I think that's a much bigger deal than the micro-transactions.
The problem is the cuts are usually generic and don't target the real waste and simply usually say, here take a 2%, 5%, 10% cut across the board while wasteful practices aren't targeted or touched. e.g. spending surplus budget before EOFY as they know if they don't they might get less the next FY, I see this every year, sometimes the waste is in the millions where they will buy services, hardware and software that never get used or touched just to ensure they don't have surplus.
A lot of it is dysfunction to combat dysfunction because if any process is delayed you can't say the $100k we budgeted for servers this year we'll need in February next year. Those money will go away and because you overbudgeted last year, we'll actually not just cut the $100k but we'll give you $150k less and you'll be stuck with extra old out of support servers because there was a delay in procurement. Sure, every company has to replan their portfolio and cancel projects sometimes. But they don't go nuclear every year and make every project and every department start over the allocation process.
The theory is of course that all the money will go back in a big pool and be spent where they're most needed. The reality is that when you've finally got approval to do something in one budget process, then no matter what you'd rather spend it than taking that fight all over again. I actually think you'd see much less waste in practice if you could get a spillover-account where you could have at most 10% of the budget but it's still "yours", sure more money would be stuck down in the system but it wouldn't accumulate and you could flex schedules more. It's the "use it or lose it" process that is the real problem.
This is the ULA trying to pretend they can be visionaries like Elon Musk too. The difference is that Elon actually works towards their goals, ULA is just rehashing fantasy that people have dreamed of ever since the 60s. Nobody is seriously working on asteroid mining technology, at best we have a few sample return missions that don't do refinement, don't do anything at scale and don't plan to return it in any way that would be commercially viable. In short it's a science mission and not a prelude to anything industrial, even a proof of concept that you could do it at all is at least a decade away and I don't see the ULA funding any of it.
And any off world production on the Moon or Mars is only going to be cheap compared to bringing the return fuel with you, sure you can pretend fuel on the ground will cost the same and that launch costs scale with gravity and come up with a fantasy number but nothing that passes the giggle test. Particularly if we soon have low-cost used rockets that can blast fuel packets most of the way into LEO then return for landing with a modest success rate. It's exactly the sort of thing you don't need 100% for.
Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.
Without religion there's a good chance they'd make some kind of peace and get over it. Like Germany started a few world wars but now 70 years later it's pretty much all history. The conflicts that last centuries where one people hates the other usually involve religion, because shit like that is the main reason to hate persons that never did anything to you personally. Maybe my ancestors did some bad shit to your ancestors but inherited sin is bullshit. In Christianity and in general.
When examining whether a business is, or can become, profitable - you can't just look at expenses. You have to look at the income side too. The submitter, and the linked articles, signally fail to do so.
With physical goods the price will rise with general costs to maintain a margin because consumers have to buy their groceries somewhere. For digital music consumers could always go back to piracy, I'm pretty sure the digital music companies have already found the sweet spot for what people will pay for convenience.
Noting depends on systemd. Nothing depends on a specific init system. Software may depend on specific APIs that expose certain kernel features like cgroups, so if you're not happy with having systemd do that then either write your own interface or pay someone to write it for you.
That's roughly as useful as saying software doesn't require Windows or Mac or Linux, just their APIs. Sure you have things like WINE but it only exists through tons of effort and still only works half the time.
The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism. Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job. It could happen - right?
Just to put this in perspective for US citizens, this is like saying you should be able to move from Silicon Valley to Montana and get an equivalent job. That people from Texas and Chicago and New York are taking the jobs that "belong to" Californians. Because those jobs would always be there, it's only a matter of who fills the position.
If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.
Sure, protectionism can protect the domestic market but it won't stop other countries from getting their stuff from China and India. And once you start putting up the fences it works both ways, your trade partners will start protecting their markets from you as well. Eventually you end up with an economy that only sells to itself which will end up like the Soviet Union.
Trade barriers won't let you turn back time to the "good old days" when your products were the envy of the world. When the competition gets tough, you can either adapt to compete or you can withdraw from the world market. Not not compete with China and India is not the same as going back to a time before China and India were competitors.
How is this autopilot legal? It sounds like one of the most dangerous devices created, inviting distracted driving. Cell phones are banned in many states for causing distracted driving, how is this not treated the same?
Semi-automated cars aren't distracting the driver, they just reduce the burden of driving just like automatic transmissions, ABS brakes, automatic windshield wipers, cruise control, intelligent cruise control, lane keeping etc. and so far nobody has said that it is too much of a good thing.
Google has taken the high road of "we'll release it when it's ready to drive itself not before" while Tesla has taken the low road of jus rolling it out and I'm sure they know this would happen. They're just hoping the legalese that the people are still technically driving will allow them to create the self-driving car incrementally. Will they be slapped down by courts and lawsuits? Time will tell, but I don't think there's any legislation in the works right now to make what Tesla does illegal.