Once these chips are available in quantity (they are not) drop them into some servers and start bench-marking them on performance per price/watt. And compare them to AMD chips coming out at that time.
If this is the benchmark that is hitting AMD where it "hurts" AMD is in good position. When your competitor benchmarks their future products against your current products instead of their current ones, you KNOW you are good.
And the latest set of benchmark shenanigans don't look good for intel either.
There is no shortage of pilots for those $300K/year jobs. Period.
There is a shortage at the 36K - $40K per year level - especially now that you need 1,500 hours which takes a fair bit of time to get (and $$). Add in quality of life issues at that pay rate - yes there is a shortage.
Put all the regional pilots on mainline contracts. Pilot shortage would go away pretty quickly.
I breathed a bit of relief that this wasn't another "battery breakthrough" story.
For the last 4-5 years it seems every popular news outlet is excited to announce battery breakthroughs. But for every breakthrough for instant charging for example they don't explain that the battery is 100x larger in size or 100x heavier or whatever. And similarly, when the battery holds 100x the energy, they don't explain the other downsides that impact its practical application. I mean, a capacitor "charges" quickly (and can discharge quickly), but with a number of trade-offs.
I don't know how to get folks to write a more nuanced story - this may just be because the sensational gets the headlines and clicks (even if not as accurate).
What's happened is the government has changed lawful access to mean secret courts with secret warrants, mass hacking and surveillance of systems we use every day for commerce etc with zero or token oversight. This is the real zone of lawlessness.
These systems can then be used for cyberstalking some ex, data sold to an investigator for profit, used politically to smear opponents etc, and result in innocent people blocked from flying, subject to extraordinary rendition, special measures interrogation techniques (ie, torture) etc without due process. If this happened in another country we'd call it extra-judicial lawlessness and condemn it.
I think many people are supportive of lawful access. This means due process, within the court system, etc etc. Suspected of x, probable cause, warrant issued but briefly sealed, warrant executed and unsealed, ability to contest basis for warrant, knowledge of its execution and existence etc, etc. This system of due process exists for a reason - and is well articulated and well developed going back to our constitution and subsequent amendments etc.
Our economy and society wins if we can rely on these systems to handle our searches for medical conditions, our emails to loved ones, confidential business information etc etc without massive invasions of privacy. Our economy and society win if we can count on the rule of law.
Small wonder Google and Apple are resisting the secret "National Security Letter" no due process system the government has invented, or the direct hacking of their systems.
I was user 341 at Sourceforge, 14 years ago. I always liked the SF.net idea. This is kinda sad to see happening.
But enough crying over spilt milk.
* Don't use Dice, don't hire folks using Dice. * Move your own projects off sourceforge. * If you need a project from sourceforge email them and ask them to avoid the download jacking by moving their project if possible * Support other providers who play fair. * If you use a website reputation tool, mark sf appropriately.
I love wikipedia (and have contributed both $ and time).
There seems to have been a move on Wikipedia away from actual contributing, and towards criticizing others. This drives new folks away.
It's far too easy to slap all the labels on articles. The rate of tagging for problems seems way above the rate of fixing.
Do these sound familiar? "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified." "This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling." "This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed." "This article may need a more detailed summary" "This article may have too many section headers dividing up its content."
Perhaps they could just put a global message up. "This Wikipedia may have items that require editing. If you find such an entry, please fix it yourself."
Before long we are going to have just heavy fisted editors, and the PR flaks paid enough to deal with them and warp the articles.
Most regular people don't have the time to battle it out, but I thank everyone who tries! And I love the "welcome to wikipedia" people, keep up the good work.
Generally, I think Sheets trails Excel by more than "Document" trails Word, but then again, I spend much more time in Excel than I do in Word.
For financial / finance use cases in particular Google "Sheets" isn't a match for Microsoft Excel. A very common formatting approach is to indent rows using narrow columns. In excel, the text overflows to the right, so you end up with an aligned / indented view of things (which you can also then make collapsible). In Sheets, this doesn't work without lots of extra clicks (merging cells etc).
I think eating your own dogfood is reasonably important if you intend the product to be a core product you offer. Not sure if Google Apps is intended to be that (search is for sure).
And if you get schools to use your product, and then prefer another product for your own jobs the optics really are pretty poor!
It did make me wonder how the Apache Foundation tries to steward open source objectives.
The donation to the Apache Foundation seemed primarily a result of the initial traction around LibreOffice, and it was odd that Apache didn't look at Libre and feel that they would be good stewards of the effort.
I could never totally figure out why OpenOffice, which for years was not Java based, added Java as a dependency.
It seemed like a massive dependency for a relatively minor set of features. Plus then every computer ended up getting the Java update notifications and at one point somehow a lot of users ended up with a Yahoo toolbar or something as part of a "security update"!
The fact that Skyhook DOES ship on android phones means there is something unique about this situation with Motorola.
I didn't catch skyhook desiring to disable GLS and still use Google's marketplace vs the alternatives. Why do you think that matters to skyhook? If GLS is disabled by default as it was in your case, it seems odd they would care about it.
As always, the other side of the story will be interesting:)
- Android is released under the Apache license. So skyhook and any handset manufacturer, if they don't like the direction google is taking the platform, can do whatever they want to the software. This is the definition of open source.
- Conversely, open source doesn't mean skyhook can force a developer to do something. Lots of business who want to make money by inclusion in a project get upset when open source projects say no. See Reiser or any other open source bug tracker.
- On top of the apache licensed Android, Google provides a set of pretty popular apps (Google Apps). Most but not all manufacturers use those apps. My guess is that if you pick up these apps, then that is where google is saying you have to use their location based service. So far these apps are good enough people generally use them, but eventually Microsoft or some other big player will pay enough $$ to a manufacturer that google maps / google search etc will go away on some handsets.
- Google also offers the Android Market, another natural place of control. Many OS Distro's use marketplaces, update channels etc to monetize their platform. This also obviously creates lock-in.
- Almost every open source project doesn't let you take their brand with your changes. So if you want to make lots of changes you probably can't call your OS "Android" vs Sense or MotoBlur. This also is common to Mozilla, Redhat etc etc. Mozilla was really picky about this (see Iceweasel).
- Skyhook is suing Google for violating it's patents on doing location. This includes ""Server for Updating Location Beacon Database". Reading these patents will make you wish software patents were toned down a bit I think.
- Skyhook is itself not an open source contribution to the handset, but apparently a pretty costly proprietary app on top of the handset with big royalties and patents with no patent pledges. In other words, if someone tries to do location service and to give it away for free, prepare to be sued by Skyhook.
- Apple dropped Skyhook from the iphone 4 I believe? Be interesting to know why given they had been a customer and skyhook claims to have the best tech.
- Open source being "nice". Big business in open source seem to still plan on using the layers above to fight for $.
So some shades of grey in this:) Be interesting to see how the case evolves.
To quote from the actual posting, "The initial version of the API will use the OpenID 2.0 protocol"
This version was developed by OpenID, and is incompatible with 1.0, but open in the same way for everyone to use, with a number of improvements... Google is forking nothing.
Slashdot runs it's 15th story about IP addresses running out "real soon now". The first was something like 5 years ago:)
These stats ignore the fact that there are huge available allocations that can go behind NAT's. An ISP can NAT big chunks of its user network. Charging even a modest amount per IP would free up huge numbers of IPs. There are abandoned blocks (companies out of business) and wildly oversized blocks (MIT etc).
Plus, we've been hearing these stories for years. The idea that the internets resources are going to become ipv6 anytime soon is unlikly. So folks are going to figure out a way to manage the existing pool, where there is lots of room for improved efficiency.
Fun to keep on reading these stories... they're always written as breaking news:)
If you are going to link to what looks like a single machine that is supposed to serve up loads of videos, a mirror would be nice in the story submission:)
I wonder if netsol would even give a refund if you typo'd. You have like 5 confirmation screens to get through. I doubt there is an easy one click process for it.
And perhaps the reason you had to explain the GPLv2 is because folks actually read it:)
I don't think as many people are going to read it v3 fully, assuming that there is some elasticity to the desire to read licenses that depend both on their length and their use of legal language.
That said, the truth is it's really wonderful to have people putting this much effort into licenses, and having the choice, which is what it still is to pick a license remains, so I do think a big thanks are in order to the EFF. Plus it's fun to see their new AGPL and FDL licenses. Perhaps this will become the absolute standard that even the big embedded market starts using.
Another thing I've come to realize is that a lot of people read and reacted to the first draft, which was I think the one that really had a lot of stuff simply wrong. I wonder how many folks read up on the subsequent releases. The only thought there would have been that I think you could have written the same ultimate license text, but if the building of it had been more open, and you hadn't started with a text that was so off base and put so many people off to start with, you'd have been better off.
This is why governments waste money, lobbying. No open process, just plunk down the money.
This is for planetspace, who "has indicated that one of its goals is to send 2,000 tourists into space within the next five years"
We are talking about a company that appears to be run by marketing people. Witness the full mockup of their rocket and the astronaut training facility.
In contrast to Scaled, Armadillo, Blue Origin etc, I don't think I've seen a single launch of any kind from them. PlanetSpace does tell us they are busy patenting all sorts of stuff.
Are you a lawyer? I've contracted significant amounts of work out to actual lawyers, and this idea that documents have to detailed and complex to be legal is obviously bogus in my experience. Can you point to some specific examples of your theory?
I'd suggest reading one of the many very interesting studies of legal documents that have been done. Things like plain language redrafting etc.
One of the things that really made GPLv2 approachable was it's directness and simplicity. I think it also gave it it's strength.
GPLv3 is one of those lawyer sounding licenses. They try to specify everything (ie, instead of saying all colors, they'll write all colors including red, orange, green, blue and any other generally considered colors not named).
But reading it over, I'm not sure it buys much, and it certainly makes it much harder to understand. And that's a real shame.
And the Tivoization issue is a bit of a red herring I think. Tivo should be required to distribute the software, so others could create a Tivo device themselves. I'm not sure it fits the original principals to force tivo to open their hardware box. It's interesting, by trying to restrict it you get all sorts of ugly side effects.
I'm looking forward to a simple 2-3 page license again in the future.
Thank goodness all the other phones are completely open and don't put you in a little sandbox!
What's weird to me is that Apple generally products which are somewhat more open, fairer, cleaner then their crappy competitors (I tried using the music services that came before itunes, ghastly by and large) and gets jumped all over. The restrictions on fairplay were loads better then the early music store restrictions / subscriptions. I did like 20
It's not clear to me that the iphone is more crippled then other phones, and it's not clear to me that it has GPLv3 software. So probably better to let it rest, or if you have a concern approach apple and ask if you think it does. They've been pretty careful so far to stay away from GPL items in the core.
Also sad to see the Open Source mark go, I always that it nice and elegant, as Free Software was obviously out, we simply created a new name for things, and could define it.
The FairTrade commmunity has been very successful following this approach. A proper trusted description can be very powerful these days with so much "bogus" stuff out there. Once trusted a mark means a lot to people.
I notice there are a ton of commercial marks using Open Source as part of their name, many in overlapping fields. It would be fantastic if it could be re-registered, but I think challenging with the proliferation of uncontested open source marks to enforce as cleanly.
But a great idea at the time, and glad to hear some effort will be made to work with "Open Source" vendors who aren't.
Slashdot Mirror
Does no one just ask - is this even a reasonable claim?
Intel is going to be on an OLDER process node - their architecture is not running 340% faster than AMD.
Intel is comparing their theoretical future chip with Epyc chips shipping now. https://www.newegg.com/Product...
Once these chips are available in quantity (they are not) drop them into some servers and start bench-marking them on performance per price /watt. And compare them to AMD chips coming out at that time.
If this is the benchmark that is hitting AMD where it "hurts" AMD is in good position. When your competitor benchmarks their future products against your current products instead of their current ones, you KNOW you are good.
And the latest set of benchmark shenanigans don't look good for intel either.
There is no shortage of pilots for those $300K/year jobs. Period.
There is a shortage at the 36K - $40K per year level - especially now that you need 1,500 hours which takes a fair bit of time to get (and $$). Add in quality of life issues at that pay rate - yes there is a shortage.
Put all the regional pilots on mainline contracts. Pilot shortage would go away pretty quickly.
How about a bounds check on some of these articles?
$1.46 per minute is $767,000 per year.
That rate makes no sense, no matter what the mark-up is to be in the cloud. Does no one read these before they go live?
I breathed a bit of relief that this wasn't another "battery breakthrough" story.
For the last 4-5 years it seems every popular news outlet is excited to announce battery breakthroughs. But for every breakthrough for instant charging for example they don't explain that the battery is 100x larger in size or 100x heavier or whatever. And similarly, when the battery holds 100x the energy, they don't explain the other downsides that impact its practical application. I mean, a capacitor "charges" quickly (and can discharge quickly), but with a number of trade-offs.
I don't know how to get folks to write a more nuanced story - this may just be because the sensational gets the headlines and clicks (even if not as accurate).
Pot meet kettle!
What's happened is the government has changed lawful access to mean secret courts with secret warrants, mass hacking and surveillance of systems we use every day for commerce etc with zero or token oversight. This is the real zone of lawlessness.
These systems can then be used for cyberstalking some ex, data sold to an investigator for profit, used politically to smear opponents etc, and result in innocent people blocked from flying, subject to extraordinary rendition, special measures interrogation techniques (ie, torture) etc without due process. If this happened in another country we'd call it extra-judicial lawlessness and condemn it.
I think many people are supportive of lawful access. This means due process, within the court system, etc etc. Suspected of x, probable cause, warrant issued but briefly sealed, warrant executed and unsealed, ability to contest basis for warrant, knowledge of its execution and existence etc, etc. This system of due process exists for a reason - and is well articulated and well developed going back to our constitution and subsequent amendments etc.
Our economy and society wins if we can rely on these systems to handle our searches for medical conditions, our emails to loved ones, confidential business information etc etc without massive invasions of privacy. Our economy and society win if we can count on the rule of law.
Small wonder Google and Apple are resisting the secret "National Security Letter" no due process system the government has invented, or the direct hacking of their systems.
I was user 341 at Sourceforge, 14 years ago.
I always liked the SF.net idea. This is kinda sad to see happening.
But enough crying over spilt milk.
* Don't use Dice, don't hire folks using Dice.
* Move your own projects off sourceforge.
* If you need a project from sourceforge email them and ask them to avoid the download jacking by moving their project if possible
* Support other providers who play fair.
* If you use a website reputation tool, mark sf appropriately.
I love wikipedia (and have contributed both $ and time).
There seems to have been a move on Wikipedia away from actual contributing, and towards criticizing others. This drives new folks away.
It's far too easy to slap all the labels on articles. The rate of tagging for problems seems way above the rate of fixing.
Do these sound familiar? "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified." "This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling." "This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed." "This article may need a more detailed summary" "This article may have too many section headers dividing up its content."
Perhaps they could just put a global message up. "This Wikipedia may have items that require editing. If you find such an entry, please fix it yourself."
Before long we are going to have just heavy fisted editors, and the PR flaks paid enough to deal with them and warp the articles.
Most regular people don't have the time to battle it out, but I thank everyone who tries! And I love the "welcome to wikipedia" people, keep up the good work.
Generally, I think Sheets trails Excel by more than "Document" trails Word, but then again, I spend much more time in Excel than I do in Word.
For financial / finance use cases in particular Google "Sheets" isn't a match for Microsoft Excel. A very common formatting approach is to indent rows using narrow columns. In excel, the text overflows to the right, so you end up with an aligned / indented view of things (which you can also then make collapsible). In Sheets, this doesn't work without lots of extra clicks (merging cells etc).
I think eating your own dogfood is reasonably important if you intend the product to be a core product you offer. Not sure if Google Apps is intended to be that (search is for sure).
And if you get schools to use your product, and then prefer another product for your own jobs the optics really are pretty poor!
It did make me wonder how the Apache Foundation tries to steward open source objectives.
The donation to the Apache Foundation seemed primarily a result of the initial traction around LibreOffice, and it was odd that Apache didn't look at Libre and feel that they would be good stewards of the effort.
I could never totally figure out why OpenOffice, which for years was not Java based, added Java as a dependency.
It seemed like a massive dependency for a relatively minor set of features. Plus then every computer ended up getting the Java update notifications and at one point somehow a lot of users ended up with a Yahoo toolbar or something as part of a "security update"!
No fun.
Canajin56:
Excellent clarifications.
The fact that Skyhook DOES ship on android phones means there is something unique about this situation with Motorola.
I didn't catch skyhook desiring to disable GLS and still use Google's marketplace vs the alternatives. Why do you think that matters to skyhook? If GLS is disabled by default as it was in your case, it seems odd they would care about it.
As always, the other side of the story will be interesting :)
This is posted in the "Know your rights" section.
A couple of quick items:
- Android is released under the Apache license. So skyhook and any handset manufacturer, if they don't like the direction google is taking the platform, can do whatever they want to the software. This is the definition of open source.
- Conversely, open source doesn't mean skyhook can force a developer to do something. Lots of business who want to make money by inclusion in a project get upset when open source projects say no. See Reiser or any other open source bug tracker.
- On top of the apache licensed Android, Google provides a set of pretty popular apps (Google Apps). Most but not all manufacturers use those apps. My guess is that if you pick up these apps, then that is where google is saying you have to use their location based service. So far these apps are good enough people generally use them, but eventually Microsoft or some other big player will pay enough $$ to a manufacturer that google maps / google search etc will go away on some handsets.
- Google also offers the Android Market, another natural place of control. Many OS Distro's use marketplaces, update channels etc to monetize their platform. This also obviously creates lock-in.
- Almost every open source project doesn't let you take their brand with your changes. So if you want to make lots of changes you probably can't call your OS "Android" vs Sense or MotoBlur. This also is common to Mozilla, Redhat etc etc. Mozilla was really picky about this (see Iceweasel).
- Skyhook is suing Google for violating it's patents on doing location. This includes ""Server for Updating Location Beacon Database". Reading these patents will make you wish software patents were toned down a bit I think.
- Skyhook is itself not an open source contribution to the handset, but apparently a pretty costly proprietary app on top of the handset with big royalties and patents with no patent pledges. In other words, if someone tries to do location service and to give it away for free, prepare to be sued by Skyhook.
- Apple dropped Skyhook from the iphone 4 I believe? Be interesting to know why given they had been a customer and skyhook claims to have the best tech.
- Open source being "nice". Big business in open source seem to still plan on using the layers above to fight for $.
So some shades of grey in this :) Be interesting to see how the case evolves.
What a ridiculous headline.
To quote from the actual posting, "The initial version of the API will use the OpenID 2.0 protocol"
This version was developed by OpenID, and is incompatible with 1.0, but open in the same way for everyone to use, with a number of improvements... Google is forking nothing.
Slashdot runs it's 15th story about IP addresses running out "real soon now". The first was something like 5 years ago :)
These stats ignore the fact that there are huge available allocations that can go behind NAT's. An ISP can NAT big chunks of its user network. Charging even a modest amount per IP would free up huge numbers of IPs. There are abandoned blocks (companies out of business) and wildly oversized blocks (MIT etc).
Plus, we've been hearing these stories for years. The idea that the internets resources are going to become ipv6 anytime soon is unlikly. So folks are going to figure out a way to manage the existing pool, where there is lots of room for improved efficiency.
Fun to keep on reading these stories... they're always written as breaking news :)
If you are going to link to what looks like a single machine that is supposed to serve up loads of videos, a mirror would be nice in the story submission :)
I wonder if netsol would even give a refund if you typo'd. You have like 5 confirmation screens to get through. I doubt there is an easy one click process for it.
- August
Of course Isn't that about 2x as long now?
And perhaps the reason you had to explain the GPLv2 is because folks actually read it
I don't think as many people are going to read it v3 fully, assuming that there is some elasticity to the desire to read licenses that depend both on their length and their use of legal language.
That said, the truth is it's really wonderful to have people putting this much effort into licenses, and having the choice, which is what it still is to pick a license remains, so I do think a big thanks are in order to the EFF. Plus it's fun to see their new AGPL and FDL licenses. Perhaps this will become the absolute standard that even the big embedded market starts using.
Another thing I've come to realize is that a lot of people read and reacted to the first draft, which was I think the one that really had a lot of stuff simply wrong. I wonder how many folks read up on the subsequent releases. The only thought there would have been that I think you could have written the same ultimate license text, but if the building of it had been more open, and you hadn't started with a text that was so off base and put so many people off to start with, you'd have been better off.
Who knows.
Yeah, I think the difficulty in nailing down this "hole" illustrates perhaps that it's not a good fit for a software license.
This gives "commercial spaceport" a bad name.
This is why governments waste money, lobbying. No open process, just plunk down the money.
This is for planetspace, who "has indicated that one of its goals is to send 2,000 tourists into space within the next five years"
We are talking about a company that appears to be run by marketing people. Witness the full mockup of their rocket and the astronaut training facility.
In contrast to Scaled, Armadillo, Blue Origin etc, I don't think I've seen a single launch of any kind from them. PlanetSpace does tell us they are busy patenting all sorts of stuff.
Kebes,
Are you a lawyer? I've contracted significant amounts of work out to actual lawyers, and this idea that documents have to detailed and complex to be legal is obviously bogus in my experience. Can you point to some specific examples of your theory?
I'd suggest reading one of the many very interesting studies of legal documents that have been done. Things like plain language redrafting etc.
Yep.
One of the things that really made GPLv2 approachable was it's directness and simplicity. I think it also gave it it's strength.
GPLv3 is one of those lawyer sounding licenses. They try to specify everything (ie, instead of saying all colors, they'll write all colors including red, orange, green, blue and any other generally considered colors not named).
But reading it over, I'm not sure it buys much, and it certainly makes it much harder to understand. And that's a real shame.
And the Tivoization issue is a bit of a red herring I think. Tivo should be required to distribute the software, so others could create a Tivo device themselves. I'm not sure it fits the original principals to force tivo to open their hardware box. It's interesting, by trying to restrict it you get all sorts of ugly side effects.
I'm looking forward to a simple 2-3 page license again in the future.
Thank goodness all the other phones are completely open and don't put you in a little sandbox!
What's weird to me is that Apple generally products which are somewhat more open, fairer, cleaner then their crappy competitors (I tried using the music services that came before itunes, ghastly by and large) and gets jumped all over. The restrictions on fairplay were loads better then the early music store restrictions / subscriptions. I did like 20
It's not clear to me that the iphone is more crippled then other phones, and it's not clear to me that it has GPLv3 software. So probably better to let it rest, or if you have a concern approach apple and ask if you think it does. They've been pretty careful so far to stay away from GPL items in the core.
BTW: We is used loosely as I didn't have anything to do with things :)
Also sad to see the Open Source mark go, I always that it nice and elegant, as Free Software was obviously out, we simply created a new name for things, and could define it.
The FairTrade commmunity has been very successful following this approach. A proper trusted description can be very powerful these days with so much "bogus" stuff out there. Once trusted a mark means a lot to people.
I notice there are a ton of commercial marks using Open Source as part of their name, many in overlapping fields. It would be fantastic if it could be re-registered, but I think challenging with the proliferation of uncontested open source marks to enforce as cleanly.
But a great idea at the time, and glad to hear some effort will be made to work with "Open Source" vendors who aren't.
Hey there,
Who are you using for origination and termination? Can't seem to find a really solid provider. Do they handle reinvites well?