If a photon hasn't struck your "camera" how do you watch it move across your field of view? I didn't see anything in the article that indicated that had a way to watch photons that are passing through your field of view but do not impact the sensor array.
"The laser pulses, with very complex timing circuitry, are then picked up by an array of 500 sensors in the camera"
This means the camera is acting just as any other camera would. It has a surface that reacts to photons impacting on it as the result of reflected laser pulses. This how our eyes work and any other camera. So there is nothing here that indicates you can somehow watch a photon passing through your field of view.
It depends on if you mean a vendor's 3rd party product versus outsourced programming.
If you hired an outside consultant and paid them by the hour to produce a custom piece of software, then I'd default to having the contract written up to include the source code as a deliverable. You might encounter resistance if its a big firm and they have reusable libraries they've created and don't want to share them. In this case the compromise might be to provide the compiled DLL's for these, but you are back at square one where you depend upon them to fix issues in those DLLs, but at least this way it reduces the dependencies.
When I think "Vendor" I think of someone who has some premade product, which seems to be what the article is refering to. I.e. its like going to a vending machine and saying I want the "Blah Blah Account Management Software". These products are usually sold to many different customers and thus have had a stream of revenue over a long period of time or for a large team to enhance the software over time. Thus they are somewhat large and even if there was a source code license option available from the vendor(although there usually isn't), the code base would probably be large and probably somewhat difficult to customize by internal staff.
Also, the cost to develop these vendor products is spread across many customers, but as the article author points out, you can pay dearly in the areas of integration and customization. You may find corner cases or new requirements down the line that the software simply cannot handle, and in my experience(having continuously been in one scenario or another dealing with a vendor for the last 5+ years) there are a lot of barriers to cross in getting the customization or fixes done.
If people are upset about the inability to customize the vendor product, then you need to go back to the stakeholders and say hey, "In light of new requirements, we clearly need a solution that 1) has some features that support these customization scenarios, OR 2) has a source code license and developers who have the skills and time to deal with implementing those customization(it's hard to know what you are getting yourself into until you actually see the source code), OR 3) roll our own solution." #3 can be a good option if you are only using a small subset of the vendor's product's features, which I've found to often be the case(since usually over time it has been enhanced to meet many customer's needs, but any single customer will only need a subset of these). Thus to roll your own solution isn't going to be nearly as complex, and may be a breath of fresh air for your users who can be overwhelmed by extra unneeded features/complexities.
I've also found that vendors put a premium on integration features. The more features they provide for integration, the more their fear that you or another vendor's product will stand in place of one of their extra "modules" that they wanted you to buy from them.
Since NaCl == Sodium Chloride == Salt, let's make this discussion more interesting by replacing all instances of "NaCl" with "salt".
"note that [salt] is nothing like Flash or Silverlight". The first consistently taste great, while the others vary in flavor from one OS to the next. I kid, I kid:)
I think the focus of the rebuilding was on enforcing building codes that would prevent future catastrophic fires.
They did try to improve the city layout, but the actual layout I don't believe was improved significantly because it would have meant buying out many property owners and the city couldn't afford that nor fight against the public outrage of displacing so many people. I seem to also remember from a documentary that so many took the initiative to begin rebuilding their homes and businesses so quickly that there wasn't any proper surveying done, plus the damage was so extensive it was difficult to tell where walls were previously. So property lines moved slightly and made things worse than before in some cases.
Exactly what I thought. So they lost like 2% of their stock over 30 year period. That's like a 20th of one percent per year. Surely there's room for improvement given the cost involved in recovering material from the moon, but it's not like they've done a horrible job.
I find the actions of the rail corporation to be pretty alarming.
So if someone leaves private information, financial documents, etc. laying around my home or business, I can just collect them up, claim them as my own, and auction them off to the highest bidder?
Aside from the fact that they were foolish to not encrypt the information on their drives, it doesn't justify ethical handling of the found information. You don't find someone's wallet then sell it to someone who could be a potential white collar criminal, and then try to make moral excuses for yourself by saying "Oh they should have encrypted their wallet..."
It seems to imply that to take advantage of the excess stockpiles of fuel... we should use less of the fuel by using a more efficient process? Oh by the way let me throw a random definition in there so maybe you won't notice how little sense this article makes.
If you have more fuel and want to take advantage of it, the biggest hurdles are probably finding a method that's safe, over comes public opinion, and is cheap enough to allow you to build enough reactors/plants to consume that fuel.
I saw a documentary where a brain surgeon was scanning a musicians brain while they were doing brain surgery and had the musician hum tunes while they mapped general locations so that they'd avoid hacking out those pieces while removing a tumor. They literally just had letters written on little pieces of paper and were just letting the wetness of his exposed brain hold them on:O
This is similar to chess in that players learn to identify certain counter strategies to other strategies. Another analogy would be like card counting in black jack, in that rather than do a full calculation of probabilities in your head, you've abstracted that process to a set of techniques. Of course these techniques are not as accurate or reliable, but in a realtime game like Starcraft, you don't have time for formulating a detailed war plan.
Agreed. A lot depends on what you want to accomplish. "Analysis" can be completely different beasts from project to project. The term "analysis" is kinda thrown around loosely and encompasses a lot of things. So it's important to not dive into the analysis if you don't have a very specific goal in mind.
Depending on the type of "analysis" you might be better off with something like PowerPivot. There's alot that you can probably gleen from your data without doing sophisticated statistics, but instead using PowerPivot to slice/dice/summarize/chart your data in different ways. It is easiest to use if you structure your data in a data warehouse/star schema fashion.
It seems the power of HTML 5 is just some new tags for multimedia and the browser support for them. It is just a markup language. When I read articles/tutorials on HTML 5, I don't see how a markup language comes anywhere close to Silverlight or Flash/Flex in terms of a rich set of libraries and language features to support interactive applications. Javascript comes no where close to touching either of these technologies IMO, and it is sad to hear the both are potentially on the way out. Additional reasons why HTML 5 alone is not the new Flash/Silverlight can be found among answers here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2172626/how-can-html5-replace-flash
I am sure someone will fill the void left by these products, perhaps something new that leverages HTML 5 for display/graphics but has something more substantial than javascript. Probably in the interim we will see libraries like javascript trying to fill the void, but its still javascript at the heart.
"last too applicants ended up crying during the tests."
Really? Is this not enough of a sign that there's something wrong with this process? It sounds like you are trying to break people instead of test them. Graphic design is usually not a matter of life and death and shouldn't be a boot camp experience, and if your testing procedures are so ridiculous that you are bringing people to tears then its time to rethink things I think.
Good interview processes discover a person's potential, not their capabilities.
Let me preface this by saying I have used many open source programs and libraries and find many of them useful. I have used GIMP off and on for a year and Photoshop for many years before that, and the same is true for my brother who for the most part agrees with my assessment of GIMP. Everything in GIMP feels unnatural, non-intuitive, and usually requires alot of googling before I can figure out how to accomplish what I need to(versus Photoshop that usually is intuitive enough to figure out without references). When I read some bug/feature reports/requests on GIMP it is clear it is a case of the designer believing they know what is best, and dismissing the concerns user base. Granted it is free and that's their decision if they want to do things their way. The point I'm getting to though is that forcing someone to use GIMP instead of Photoshop on the spot is a little extreme. I understand your goal, but they are such different beasts that I feel that's a little eccentric. I think if I were put through that my first intuition would be that these eccentric approaches are probably also unnecessarily forced into projects on a regular basis despite the best interests of the projects' success.
If your goal is to test critical thinking, there's plenty of ways to do that within Photoshop. Photoshop is very much like math in that there's usually lots of different ways to approach the same solution, and if you formulated the task appropriately you would give them an opportunity to demonstrate their critical thinking. There's also the same aspect of quick and dirty versus maintainable/flexible that you'd find in programming, where you can ask them questions like "If we needed to swap out this part of the graphic every week, what would you do to allow those weekly edits to be as efficient and consistent as possible without?" Someone with good critical thinking will think about how they can structure the layers and effects/macros so they don't have to manually repeat the same steps every week.
I just always wonder about the chunk of people who are initially zealously for something and then zealously against it later. They seem unaware of their stupidity and never learn from it. We expect ourselves to learn from the mistakes of others long past, but we don't even learn from our own personal mistakes that happened in our own lifetime.
For example, I see people posting things on Facebook about "Support our troops, bring them home". Yet a few years if you spoke out against sending troops overseas, those same people would have labelled you unpatriotic and that you didn't support our troops. You couldn't have any rational discussion with these people about war because they were so zealous that being rational wasn't something they were concerned with.
They basically regurgitate whatever talking points they hear on their news network of choice. The sheer stupidity of this astounds me. That they can arrive at completely opposite conclusions and not learn from their own stupidity or even be aware of how horrible it was for them to mistakenly attack their fellow Americans.
It reminds me of Captain Hindsight from South Park. As soon as the ill effects of something they supported becomes apparent, they switch side and join the bandwagon of "should have"'s.
I'm curious why is the term "emulator" used? What about this makes in an emulator of a SSH terminal? Is it just because it's being run in a web browser?
Be careful though, because depending on how the folder encryption software works, it may also be transparent to DropBox. I.e. the DropBox application when reading from the folder, gets the unencrypted version of the file, just as if you tried to open the file up yourself(since DropBox is probably running under your account). This would be the case if you were using the folder encryption feature that comes with Windows. The easy way to test this is to download the file from DropBox onto another computer that doesn't have the particular folder encryption product you are using, and verify that you are unable to open the file, i.e. it is the encrypted version of the file.
It is also perceivable they are also doing some sort of de-duplication so that they aren't storing duplicate data across users. If it were encrypted in the way they would like us to believe, I don't think this would be possible, but they definitely have an incentive to be able to decrypt the data, because then that would save them significant storage space by being able to perform compression/de-duplication.
Imagine if lots of people had the same 1 gb movie saved to dropbox, and DropBox could save hundreds of GB by only storing one instance of it.
Exactly. When I see people misusing the term broken, it sounds like they are trying to make something sound worse than it is. I think it has become apart of geek culture because they feel they have to state things over the top for anyone to take them seriously, but too me it just seems childish.
The way people throw the term "broken" around annoys me. "Poorly implemented/designed" would be more accurate. Broken implies it doesn't work at all, which is far from the truth.
And it does make sense, in that we expect that something which exhibits classic trends of manufactured information being published on fox news, because they are well known for not following up stories with any fact finding or verification. This is based on facts and you can use the search feature yourself to locate these studies yourself.
I'm not trollling, but actually referring to the 2 separate studies posted previously on Slashdot that showed that viewers of Fox news are more misinformed than those who get their news from elsewhere. I was simply making a reference to information that was previously posted on Slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess it'd be a little like watching grass grow.
If a photon hasn't struck your "camera" how do you watch it move across your field of view? I didn't see anything in the article that indicated that had a way to watch photons that are passing through your field of view but do not impact the sensor array.
"The laser pulses, with very complex timing circuitry, are then picked up by an array of 500 sensors in the camera"
This means the camera is acting just as any other camera would. It has a surface that reacts to photons impacting on it as the result of reflected laser pulses. This how our eyes work and any other camera. So there is nothing here that indicates you can somehow watch a photon passing through your field of view.
It depends on if you mean a vendor's 3rd party product versus outsourced programming.
If you hired an outside consultant and paid them by the hour to produce a custom piece of software, then I'd default to having the contract written up to include the source code as a deliverable. You might encounter resistance if its a big firm and they have reusable libraries they've created and don't want to share them. In this case the compromise might be to provide the compiled DLL's for these, but you are back at square one where you depend upon them to fix issues in those DLLs, but at least this way it reduces the dependencies.
When I think "Vendor" I think of someone who has some premade product, which seems to be what the article is refering to. I.e. its like going to a vending machine and saying I want the "Blah Blah Account Management Software". These products are usually sold to many different customers and thus have had a stream of revenue over a long period of time or for a large team to enhance the software over time. Thus they are somewhat large and even if there was a source code license option available from the vendor(although there usually isn't), the code base would probably be large and probably somewhat difficult to customize by internal staff.
Also, the cost to develop these vendor products is spread across many customers, but as the article author points out, you can pay dearly in the areas of integration and customization. You may find corner cases or new requirements down the line that the software simply cannot handle, and in my experience(having continuously been in one scenario or another dealing with a vendor for the last 5+ years) there are a lot of barriers to cross in getting the customization or fixes done.
If people are upset about the inability to customize the vendor product, then you need to go back to the stakeholders and say hey, "In light of new requirements, we clearly need a solution that 1) has some features that support these customization scenarios, OR 2) has a source code license and developers who have the skills and time to deal with implementing those customization(it's hard to know what you are getting yourself into until you actually see the source code), OR 3) roll our own solution." #3 can be a good option if you are only using a small subset of the vendor's product's features, which I've found to often be the case(since usually over time it has been enhanced to meet many customer's needs, but any single customer will only need a subset of these). Thus to roll your own solution isn't going to be nearly as complex, and may be a breath of fresh air for your users who can be overwhelmed by extra unneeded features/complexities.
I've also found that vendors put a premium on integration features. The more features they provide for integration, the more their fear that you or another vendor's product will stand in place of one of their extra "modules" that they wanted you to buy from them.
Thanks for the payment. Attached is the program that improves your performance by 1x a hundred times. 1*1*1*1....
If I utilize both technologies, will my browser rap for me?
Since NaCl == Sodium Chloride == Salt, let's make this discussion more interesting by replacing all instances of "NaCl" with "salt".
"note that [salt] is nothing like Flash or Silverlight". The first consistently taste great, while the others vary in flavor from one OS to the next. I kid, I kid :)
I think the focus of the rebuilding was on enforcing building codes that would prevent future catastrophic fires.
They did try to improve the city layout, but the actual layout I don't believe was improved significantly because it would have meant buying out many property owners and the city couldn't afford that nor fight against the public outrage of displacing so many people. I seem to also remember from a documentary that so many took the initiative to begin rebuilding their homes and businesses so quickly that there wasn't any proper surveying done, plus the damage was so extensive it was difficult to tell where walls were previously. So property lines moved slightly and made things worse than before in some cases.
Exactly what I thought. So they lost like 2% of their stock over 30 year period. That's like a 20th of one percent per year. Surely there's room for improvement given the cost involved in recovering material from the moon, but it's not like they've done a horrible job.
I find the actions of the rail corporation to be pretty alarming.
So if someone leaves private information, financial documents, etc. laying around my home or business, I can just collect them up, claim them as my own, and auction them off to the highest bidder?
Aside from the fact that they were foolish to not encrypt the information on their drives, it doesn't justify ethical handling of the found information. You don't find someone's wallet then sell it to someone who could be a potential white collar criminal, and then try to make moral excuses for yourself by saying "Oh they should have encrypted their wallet..."
It seems to imply that to take advantage of the excess stockpiles of fuel... we should use less of the fuel by using a more efficient process? Oh by the way let me throw a random definition in there so maybe you won't notice how little sense this article makes.
If you have more fuel and want to take advantage of it, the biggest hurdles are probably finding a method that's safe, over comes public opinion, and is cheap enough to allow you to build enough reactors/plants to consume that fuel.
I saw a documentary where a brain surgeon was scanning a musicians brain while they were doing brain surgery and had the musician hum tunes while they mapped general locations so that they'd avoid hacking out those pieces while removing a tumor. They literally just had letters written on little pieces of paper and were just letting the wetness of his exposed brain hold them on :O
Yeh, I've watched videos where a player during any kind of idle time will click on and off things just to keep their APM up...
This is similar to chess in that players learn to identify certain counter strategies to other strategies. Another analogy would be like card counting in black jack, in that rather than do a full calculation of probabilities in your head, you've abstracted that process to a set of techniques. Of course these techniques are not as accurate or reliable, but in a realtime game like Starcraft, you don't have time for formulating a detailed war plan.
Agreed. A lot depends on what you want to accomplish. "Analysis" can be completely different beasts from project to project. The term "analysis" is kinda thrown around loosely and encompasses a lot of things. So it's important to not dive into the analysis if you don't have a very specific goal in mind.
Depending on the type of "analysis" you might be better off with something like PowerPivot. There's alot that you can probably gleen from your data without doing sophisticated statistics, but instead using PowerPivot to slice/dice/summarize/chart your data in different ways. It is easiest to use if you structure your data in a data warehouse/star schema fashion.
It seems the power of HTML 5 is just some new tags for multimedia and the browser support for them. It is just a markup language. When I read articles/tutorials on HTML 5, I don't see how a markup language comes anywhere close to Silverlight or Flash/Flex in terms of a rich set of libraries and language features to support interactive applications. Javascript comes no where close to touching either of these technologies IMO, and it is sad to hear the both are potentially on the way out. Additional reasons why HTML 5 alone is not the new Flash/Silverlight can be found among answers here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2172626/how-can-html5-replace-flash
I am sure someone will fill the void left by these products, perhaps something new that leverages HTML 5 for display/graphics but has something more substantial than javascript. Probably in the interim we will see libraries like javascript trying to fill the void, but its still javascript at the heart.
"last too applicants ended up crying during the tests."
Really? Is this not enough of a sign that there's something wrong with this process? It sounds like you are trying to break people instead of test them. Graphic design is usually not a matter of life and death and shouldn't be a boot camp experience, and if your testing procedures are so ridiculous that you are bringing people to tears then its time to rethink things I think.
Good interview processes discover a person's potential, not their capabilities.
Let me preface this by saying I have used many open source programs and libraries and find many of them useful. I have used GIMP off and on for a year and Photoshop for many years before that, and the same is true for my brother who for the most part agrees with my assessment of GIMP. Everything in GIMP feels unnatural, non-intuitive, and usually requires alot of googling before I can figure out how to accomplish what I need to(versus Photoshop that usually is intuitive enough to figure out without references). When I read some bug/feature reports/requests on GIMP it is clear it is a case of the designer believing they know what is best, and dismissing the concerns user base. Granted it is free and that's their decision if they want to do things their way. The point I'm getting to though is that forcing someone to use GIMP instead of Photoshop on the spot is a little extreme. I understand your goal, but they are such different beasts that I feel that's a little eccentric. I think if I were put through that my first intuition would be that these eccentric approaches are probably also unnecessarily forced into projects on a regular basis despite the best interests of the projects' success.
If your goal is to test critical thinking, there's plenty of ways to do that within Photoshop. Photoshop is very much like math in that there's usually lots of different ways to approach the same solution, and if you formulated the task appropriately you would give them an opportunity to demonstrate their critical thinking. There's also the same aspect of quick and dirty versus maintainable/flexible that you'd find in programming, where you can ask them questions like "If we needed to swap out this part of the graphic every week, what would you do to allow those weekly edits to be as efficient and consistent as possible without?" Someone with good critical thinking will think about how they can structure the layers and effects/macros so they don't have to manually repeat the same steps every week.
I just always wonder about the chunk of people who are initially zealously for something and then zealously against it later. They seem unaware of their stupidity and never learn from it. We expect ourselves to learn from the mistakes of others long past, but we don't even learn from our own personal mistakes that happened in our own lifetime.
For example, I see people posting things on Facebook about "Support our troops, bring them home". Yet a few years if you spoke out against sending troops overseas, those same people would have labelled you unpatriotic and that you didn't support our troops. You couldn't have any rational discussion with these people about war because they were so zealous that being rational wasn't something they were concerned with.
They basically regurgitate whatever talking points they hear on their news network of choice. The sheer stupidity of this astounds me. That they can arrive at completely opposite conclusions and not learn from their own stupidity or even be aware of how horrible it was for them to mistakenly attack their fellow Americans.
It reminds me of Captain Hindsight from South Park. As soon as the ill effects of something they supported becomes apparent, they switch side and join the bandwagon of "should have"'s.
I'm curious why is the term "emulator" used? What about this makes in an emulator of a SSH terminal? Is it just because it's being run in a web browser?
Be careful though, because depending on how the folder encryption software works, it may also be transparent to DropBox. I.e. the DropBox application when reading from the folder, gets the unencrypted version of the file, just as if you tried to open the file up yourself(since DropBox is probably running under your account). This would be the case if you were using the folder encryption feature that comes with Windows. The easy way to test this is to download the file from DropBox onto another computer that doesn't have the particular folder encryption product you are using, and verify that you are unable to open the file, i.e. it is the encrypted version of the file.
It is also perceivable they are also doing some sort of de-duplication so that they aren't storing duplicate data across users. If it were encrypted in the way they would like us to believe, I don't think this would be possible, but they definitely have an incentive to be able to decrypt the data, because then that would save them significant storage space by being able to perform compression/de-duplication.
Imagine if lots of people had the same 1 gb movie saved to dropbox, and DropBox could save hundreds of GB by only storing one instance of it.
Exactly. When I see people misusing the term broken, it sounds like they are trying to make something sound worse than it is. I think it has become apart of geek culture because they feel they have to state things over the top for anyone to take them seriously, but too me it just seems childish.
The way people throw the term "broken" around annoys me. "Poorly implemented/designed" would be more accurate. Broken implies it doesn't work at all, which is far from the truth.
And it does make sense, in that we expect that something which exhibits classic trends of manufactured information being published on fox news, because they are well known for not following up stories with any fact finding or verification. This is based on facts and you can use the search feature yourself to locate these studies yourself.
I'm not trollling, but actually referring to the 2 separate studies posted previously on Slashdot that showed that viewers of Fox news are more misinformed than those who get their news from elsewhere. I was simply making a reference to information that was previously posted on Slashdot.