I'll admin a reasonable amount of ignorance before asking this question.
Mobile (cell for you Yanks) phones are banned from flights due to (I presume) radio interference. Will hundreds of RFID tags not pose a similar risk?
Also Fewer than a million of the 80 million or so bags Delta handles in an average year fail to reach their final destination
So around 1 in 80 bags ends up on the wrong flight? So, assuming 1 bag/passenger, around 7 bags get lost on a typical 747 flight? That sounds an awful lot to me.
No. Someone who's seen almost exactly the same behaviour in a website that he worked on, where "no records found" was for some reason a static flag, and if someone did a valid search at exactly the same time as someone who got no results, then they would get the "no results" message.
Not the only possible option, admittedly, but one that could be, and has been, a cause of this symptom.
I did a search for cheesecake and got 0 entries. I tried a couple of minutes later and got loads. Evidently not very stable yet, but it is only in beta, so not too surprising. My guess would be incorrect use of a static/global variable.
Surely you aren't trying to 'dive into the code' before the specification is complete? But hell, I've known programmers just like that...
I don't know about haystor's individual case, but in our department, the detailed design currently is the code. I got handed some detailed designs to review the other day, and several of them were literally 15 pages of COBOL code with a few titles between them in a Word document - the idea being very much that we can now ship these "designs" off to India to "code" (i.e., cut and paste) from. I'm all for properly structured design - not just diving straight into coding - and if there's a section in a detailed design that does need a specific piece of code written a specific way, then maybe a few lines of an actual code sample may not be a bad thing, but having the entire program written in a Word document by one person, and then pasted into a COBOL editor by someone else is a bad (and very wasteful) thing. It also makes outsourcing self-perpetuating - "You lot took two months to design this stuff. Those outsourcers coded it up in a couple of weeks" - I've actually heard that arguement used by managers. Well, duh. I think that two weeks to cut and paste someone else's code is pretty shocking, myself.
Do you think you can do a better job writing "for (int i=0; iMAX_LEN; i++)" better than anyone else?
I don't, and in our case, that's pretty much the point. Our designs would be expected to contain "for (int i=0; i<MAX_LEN; i++){....}", rather than "check that each element contains at least one item" or whatever, and the point about identifying bugs is spot on - if you're writing and unit testing the code based on some description of the intent, then you may well spot where you're looping too many times through your code (because it doesn't do what you expect), whereas when you are writing the code in the document, you can't test it, and by the time the doc arrives at the coder, all he sees is a for loop - he doesn't really see the purpose of it, how it fits in the bigger picture etc, so he has no idea that it should actually loop one less time. Sure, comments could help, but when people are being pushed on deadlines, source comments in the document are being seen as the first thing to go, and as these docs aren't code reviewed ("that happens during the coding phase", I've been told), the lack of comments is not usually spotted, and as the designers are being measured on how quickly they can get these documents produced, and whether they contain enough detail for a coder to pick up and use, rather than whether the document is accurate, guess which option they take.
I'm in England and pretty much everyone I know in my IT dept. has at least come across "The Mythical Man Month", if not read it.
It was probably the first non-technical IT book I read (many years ago), and I remember it had a very big influence on me back then. I really ought to re-read it.
I've forgotten who said it originally, but if cell phones really were dangerous on planes, why don't terrorists use them to blow up the plane, and why do airports x-ray your shoes before you get on the plane, but still allow you to carry you cell phone with you.
I would debunk your shit point for point, I want to.
Go on then, please. I'd be fascinated.
As my "shit" was simply pointing out that
A) the defence pushed that as a arguement in order to taint one of the prosecution witnesses, and B) by doing so put seeds of doubt into the jury's mind about his motives and therefore his evidence,
I'm not quite sure which bit you'd be hoping to disprove.
You do realise that I wasn't claiming that I actually believed Furhman did frame OJ, don't you?
You may want to argue about "guy who tells nigger jokes", but I think that "guy who privately hates blacks" pretty much comes under my definition of a racist.
I don't see how his personal views are all that relevant.
Don't you? Are you more or less likely to believe what someone tells you about someone else if you know that they are already prejudiced against that person?
barely plausible "whitey is just trying to keep the black man down"
Are you trying to claim that racism doesn't happen??? The white race is not en-mass trying to keep the black race down, but there are plenty of white people who quite blatantly try to keep individual black people down.
that a single racist couldn't frame or sabotage the investigation
When he's responsible for important evidence, like the blood-stained glove, doubts about his motives can be used to undermine that evidence, and begin to put questions in the jury's mind. This, on it's own, probably isn't enough to make enough people have "reasonable doubt", but will certainly get people beginning to question the case.
There's a big difference between belief and proof beyond all reasonable doubt.
Such things as having Mark Fuhrman, who it was not difficult for the defence to paint as a racist (whether he actually is or not, I can't possibly comment), as one of the key prosecution witnesses in such a racially charged trial, should certainly open up some level of doubt.
I really struggle with understanding what this kind of patent is actually patenting. People have been selling live recordings for many years, and live CDs since probably around the time that CDs were invented. The fact that you are selling them immediately after the concert seems to me to be neither here nor there. What is the allowable length of time between the end of the show and the selling of the CD before this just becomes another standard live album? 10 mins? 1 hr? 1 day?
Can I patent the idea of selling MP3 downloads of each track as soon as the track is finished?
Or with 30 odd different applications with different usernames and different password rules/expiry periods. I cannot remember all of my passwords, and cannot afford to spend a couple of hours every few weeks trying to keep them all in sync.
Did I? Are you sure? Have you actually read my post? I commented on seeing many solo SUV drivers, I commented on my bike being quicker and more efficient, and I expressed an opinion on SUVs not being the most appropriate tool. I don't recall anything about banning them. Would you like to post the actual quote?
If you called for a ban on hammers, because you don't want people opening cans with them, you'd be infringing upon my freedom.
If I had, then yes I would, but as I didn't, I wasn't. It's not big, or clever, to make up random claims about what I said in order to argue against them.
We all know there was no traffic before SUVs became popular.
There was very little traffic before cars became popular, and as I said in the post if every solo driver in a car.... Maybe you might consider reading my posts before replying.
If you're doing that, you're probably one of those dicks that gives bikes a bad name by illegally driving on the shoulder or in between cars.
No. I'll be one of those British motorcyclists, where it's not only legal, but perfectly normal practice to ride between or past cars. Are you trying to restrict my freedom by banning it here?
And before you claim that this is the reason that I almost get hit by SUVs, I'm extremely careful when doing this and the only times I've ever almost been hit has been when I'm right in the centre of a lane and the vehicle in the next lane has decided that they have more right to be there than I have.
It's supposed to be a free country where I live, and telling people what to drive goes against my definition of 'free'
Hmm. I don't remember telling anyone what they must drive, just pointing out that (in my opinion) a bike is usually much more practical for these kinds of journeys. If I told you that a hammer probably wasn't the best way to open a can of beans, would you feel that I was taking away your freedom?
I don't care if a single guy wants to drive an SUV.
Telling someone what to drive is very different from caring what they drive. SUV drivers are usually the ones that ignore me and almost knock me off. They also take up large amounts of road. Traffic jams would probably become a thing of the past if every solo driver in a car was on a bike instead. And even at 28-35MPG, it's still around half as fuel efficient as my bike.
I'd MUCH rather be in an SUV than on a bike when it's raining.
I can understand this, and there has been the odd occasion that I've thought that, but mostly I'd still rather get home in 10 mins on my bike rather than spend 1/2 hr in a traffic jam in an SUV.
Sure you may need to tow things sometimes, or take 4 passengers, but I regularly see SUVs with one person in driving to work.
My motorbike gets 65+ MPG and can get me to work a hell of a lot quicker than an SUV. I wouldn't consider it a sensible tool for towing a caravan and in a similar way an SUV isn't a sensible tool to get one person 10 miles to work in the morning.
My work mailbox is currently 250MB and that doesn't include the 800MB that I've archived off to my hard disk. This is mostly pretty important (to me) emails/documents, and I keep them partly as an audit trail to be able to say things like "I sent you this doc in January, so don't claim that you haven't seen it". It's amazing how often I have to do that.
Today's keyboard, telephone keypads, ATM machines and even door locks have a rubber membrane underneath the keys.
"This membrane acts like a drum, and each key hits the drum in a different location and produces a unique frequency or sound that the neural networking software can decipher," said Asonov
All you have to do is stand by the ATM and press each key a few times to find out which one is making which noise.
Now - that which was perpetrated - was it less wrong in Germany just because those against it were in the minority
In the eyes of a person who shares your morals, no. But if the Nazis has won the war, I suspect many people would have had no moral problem with it. Morals are not absolute or universal. It's true that you can apply your moral values to any point in history and say that (for instance) human sacrifice has always been wrong in your eyes. But that doesn't prove that morals are universal. How do you know that human sacrifice is wrong? Why have so many religions actively promoted it?
would it be right no matter how many supported it?
No. Your morality isn't based on what a majority think. It's based on what you believe to be right or wrong (although that is usually strongly influenced by the culture that you are in - hence most people, I suspect, today believe that genocide and human sacrifice are wrong). But different people do have different views on it - therefore there is no univeral morality.
How many times will the studio release a DVD, only to come out with a better release, and another one. It is the same thing with all the Special Editions, followed by the Directors Edition
As many times as people will buy it.
How many times do the Studios want us buying the same movie/show?
As many as you can.
Either way, this is a crooked way to conduct buisness.
If people want to keep buying them, then the studios are right to keep selling them, surely? There's no law that makes people buy these things. If you think they are a rip-off, then don't buy them. If enough people think they are a rip-off, then the studios will stop doing it.
For a lot of people 200(ish)Mhz still is enough. My wife was running happily on a 266Mhz PC until 2 weeks ago when it finally gave up the ghost. She's upgraded to about the cheapest new PC that we could find (2.6 Ghz), and can't really tell than much of a difference with what she's doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Mobile (cell for you Yanks) phones are banned from flights due to (I presume) radio interference. Will hundreds of RFID tags not pose a similar risk?
Also Fewer than a million of the 80 million or so bags Delta handles in an average year fail to reach their final destination
So around 1 in 80 bags ends up on the wrong flight? So, assuming 1 bag/passenger, around 7 bags get lost on a typical 747 flight? That sounds an awful lot to me.
No. Someone who's seen almost exactly the same behaviour in a website that he worked on, where "no records found" was for some reason a static flag, and if someone did a valid search at exactly the same time as someone who got no results, then they would get the "no results" message.
Not the only possible option, admittedly, but one that could be, and has been, a cause of this symptom.
Don't abuse what you don't understand.
I did a search for cheesecake and got 0 entries. I tried a couple of minutes later and got loads. Evidently not very stable yet, but it is only in beta, so not too surprising. My guess would be incorrect use of a static/global variable.
I think you'll find that this should be a capital I. You should have learned that in first grade.
People in glass houses and all that.
He still got $10M severance - I don't think he's going to be starving in the near future.
Why are you so arrogant to believe that your idea of art is good enough to thrust into the faces of people who don't ask for it?
Do you really believe that you know better about what other people should look at than they do?
I don't know about haystor's individual case, but in our department, the detailed design currently is the code. I got handed some detailed designs to review the other day, and several of them were literally 15 pages of COBOL code with a few titles between them in a Word document - the idea being very much that we can now ship these "designs" off to India to "code" (i.e., cut and paste) from. I'm all for properly structured design - not just diving straight into coding - and if there's a section in a detailed design that does need a specific piece of code written a specific way, then maybe a few lines of an actual code sample may not be a bad thing, but having the entire program written in a Word document by one person, and then pasted into a COBOL editor by someone else is a bad (and very wasteful) thing.
It also makes outsourcing self-perpetuating - "You lot took two months to design this stuff. Those outsourcers coded it up in a couple of weeks" - I've actually heard that arguement used by managers. Well, duh. I think that two weeks to cut and paste someone else's code is pretty shocking, myself.
Do you think you can do a better job writing "for (int i=0; iMAX_LEN; i++)" better than anyone else?
I don't, and in our case, that's pretty much the point. Our designs would be expected to contain "for (int i=0; i<MAX_LEN; i++){....}", rather than "check that each element contains at least one item" or whatever, and the point about identifying bugs is spot on - if you're writing and unit testing the code based on some description of the intent, then you may well spot where you're looping too many times through your code (because it doesn't do what you expect), whereas when you are writing the code in the document, you can't test it, and by the time the doc arrives at the coder, all he sees is a for loop - he doesn't really see the purpose of it, how it fits in the bigger picture etc, so he has no idea that it should actually loop one less time. Sure, comments could help, but when people are being pushed on deadlines, source comments in the document are being seen as the first thing to go, and as these docs aren't code reviewed ("that happens during the coding phase", I've been told), the lack of comments is not usually spotted, and as the designers are being measured on how quickly they can get these documents produced, and whether they contain enough detail for a coder to pick up and use, rather than whether the document is accurate, guess which option they take.I'm in England and pretty much everyone I know in my IT dept. has at least come across "The Mythical Man Month", if not read it.
It was probably the first non-technical IT book I read (many years ago), and I remember it had a very big influence on me back then. I really ought to re-read it.
I've forgotten who said it originally, but if cell phones really were dangerous on planes, why don't terrorists use them to blow up the plane, and why do airports x-ray your shoes before you get on the plane, but still allow you to carry you cell phone with you.
I would debunk your shit point for point, I want to.
Go on then, please. I'd be fascinated.
As my "shit" was simply pointing out that
A) the defence pushed that as a arguement in order to taint one of the prosecution witnesses, and
B) by doing so put seeds of doubt into the jury's mind about his motives and therefore his evidence,
I'm not quite sure which bit you'd be hoping to disprove.
You do realise that I wasn't claiming that I actually believed Furhman did frame OJ, don't you?
I don't see how his personal views are all that relevant.
Don't you? Are you more or less likely to believe what someone tells you about someone else if you know that they are already prejudiced against that person?
barely plausible "whitey is just trying to keep the black man down"
Are you trying to claim that racism doesn't happen??? The white race is not en-mass trying to keep the black race down, but there are plenty of white people who quite blatantly try to keep individual black people down.
that a single racist couldn't frame or sabotage the investigation
When he's responsible for important evidence, like the blood-stained glove, doubts about his motives can be used to undermine that evidence, and begin to put questions in the jury's mind. This, on it's own, probably isn't enough to make enough people have "reasonable doubt", but will certainly get people beginning to question the case.FWIW, I personally think OJ probably did do it.
There's a big difference between belief and proof beyond all reasonable doubt.
Such things as having Mark Fuhrman, who it was not difficult for the defence to paint as a racist (whether he actually is or not, I can't possibly comment), as one of the key prosecution witnesses in such a racially charged trial, should certainly open up some level of doubt.
Things must have changed at college since my day, or are you talking about reminders for your favourite daytime TV show?
I really struggle with understanding what this kind of patent is actually patenting. People have been selling live recordings for many years, and live CDs since probably around the time that CDs were invented. The fact that you are selling them immediately after the concert seems to me to be neither here nor there. What is the allowable length of time between the end of the show and the selling of the CD before this just becomes another standard live album? 10 mins? 1 hr? 1 day?
Can I patent the idea of selling MP3 downloads of each track as soon as the track is finished?
Or with 30 odd different applications with different usernames and different password rules/expiry periods. I cannot remember all of my passwords, and cannot afford to spend a couple of hours every few weeks trying to keep them all in sync.
Or you could get a motorbike (mine does around 65mpg), which is even better for getting around the city.
Did I? Are you sure? Have you actually read my post? I commented on seeing many solo SUV drivers, I commented on my bike being quicker and more efficient, and I expressed an opinion on SUVs not being the most appropriate tool. I don't recall anything about banning them. Would you like to post the actual quote?
If you called for a ban on hammers, because you don't want people opening cans with them, you'd be infringing upon my freedom.
If I had, then yes I would, but as I didn't, I wasn't. It's not big, or clever, to make up random claims about what I said in order to argue against them.
We all know there was no traffic before SUVs became popular.
There was very little traffic before cars became popular, and as I said in the post if every solo driver in a car.... Maybe you might consider reading my posts before replying.
If you're doing that, you're probably one of those dicks that gives bikes a bad name by illegally driving on the shoulder or in between cars.
No. I'll be one of those British motorcyclists, where it's not only legal, but perfectly normal practice to ride between or past cars. Are you trying to restrict my freedom by banning it here?
And before you claim that this is the reason that I almost get hit by SUVs, I'm extremely careful when doing this and the only times I've ever almost been hit has been when I'm right in the centre of a lane and the vehicle in the next lane has decided that they have more right to be there than I have.
Hmm. I don't remember telling anyone what they must drive, just pointing out that (in my opinion) a bike is usually much more practical for these kinds of journeys. If I told you that a hammer probably wasn't the best way to open a can of beans, would you feel that I was taking away your freedom?
I don't care if a single guy wants to drive an SUV.
Telling someone what to drive is very different from caring what they drive. SUV drivers are usually the ones that ignore me and almost knock me off. They also take up large amounts of road. Traffic jams would probably become a thing of the past if every solo driver in a car was on a bike instead. And even at 28-35MPG, it's still around half as fuel efficient as my bike.
I'd MUCH rather be in an SUV than on a bike when it's raining.
I can understand this, and there has been the odd occasion that I've thought that, but mostly I'd still rather get home in 10 mins on my bike rather than spend 1/2 hr in a traffic jam in an SUV.
Sure you may need to tow things sometimes, or take 4 passengers, but I regularly see SUVs with one person in driving to work.
My motorbike gets 65+ MPG and can get me to work a hell of a lot quicker than an SUV. I wouldn't consider it a sensible tool for towing a caravan and in a similar way an SUV isn't a sensible tool to get one person 10 miles to work in the morning.
My work mailbox is currently 250MB and that doesn't include the 800MB that I've archived off to my hard disk. This is mostly pretty important (to me) emails/documents, and I keep them partly as an audit trail to be able to say things like "I sent you this doc in January, so don't claim that you haven't seen it". It's amazing how often I have to do that.
But then, (assuming you believe in evolution) all life presumably evolved from a single organism somewhere in the past.
Today's keyboard, telephone keypads, ATM machines and even door locks have a rubber membrane underneath the keys.
"This membrane acts like a drum, and each key hits the drum in a different location and produces a unique frequency or sound that the neural networking software can decipher," said Asonov
All you have to do is stand by the ATM and press each key a few times to find out which one is making which noise.
In the eyes of a person who shares your morals, no. But if the Nazis has won the war, I suspect many people would have had no moral problem with it. Morals are not absolute or universal. It's true that you can apply your moral values to any point in history and say that (for instance) human sacrifice has always been wrong in your eyes. But that doesn't prove that morals are universal. How do you know that human sacrifice is wrong? Why have so many religions actively promoted it?
would it be right no matter how many supported it?
No. Your morality isn't based on what a majority think. It's based on what you believe to be right or wrong (although that is usually strongly influenced by the culture that you are in - hence most people, I suspect, today believe that genocide and human sacrifice are wrong). But different people do have different views on it - therefore there is no univeral morality.
As many times as people will buy it.
How many times do the Studios want us buying the same movie/show?
As many as you can.
Either way, this is a crooked way to conduct buisness.
If people want to keep buying them, then the studios are right to keep selling them, surely? There's no law that makes people buy these things. If you think they are a rip-off, then don't buy them. If enough people think they are a rip-off, then the studios will stop doing it.
For a lot of people 200(ish)Mhz still is enough. My wife was running happily on a 266Mhz PC until 2 weeks ago when it finally gave up the ghost. She's upgraded to about the cheapest new PC that we could find (2.6 Ghz), and can't really tell than much of a difference with what she's doing.