I think you confuse intent with motivation. Punishment should fit the crime, not the motivation. To do so is a step towards thought crime. I'm not saying it's a slippery slope. I'm saying it's just wrong.
Murder is the crime of killing someone with intent. Whether I kill someone because they slept with my wife or because I owe them money, it is the same crime. If I kill someone because I hate them for their their race or because of a grudge, why should one act be a hate crime and the other not?
That wasn't my experience. Worry about fitting in? Not really. I always had a few good friends growing up, and that was all I cared about. Even so, I learned to listen and not make an ass of myself, so existing in a room of strangers or vague acquaintances wasn't a problem for me. Sure, I had a few bullies to deal with, but most of them were poor souls who were themselves bullied and thought I would be an easy target. I wasn't. Neurotic? I believe I was less neurotic than the majority of my classmates who fretted over their popularity.
P.S. I was a physics major, once upon a time. P.P.S I am guilty of having done what is portrayed in that comic. P.P.P.S I had a physic prof comment on me looking down on chemistry, "as you should." I *think* the comment was tongue-in-cheek.
You may recall the time Schrodinger was pulled over for speeding and the officer asked to search the vehicle. Having nothing to hide, Schrodinger consented. When the officer opened the trunk he found a dead cat and asked, "Did you know you have a dead cat in your trunk?" Schrodinger replied indignantly, "Well, I do now!"
I have been reading the law in question and the complaint in attempts to argue against you... but I can not. The Oregon law literately says that a person can't refer to themselves an "engineer" in Oregon without the appropriate certifications. What a ridiculous fucking law.
He is an engineer just not registered in their state from the previous Slashdot post. Think it's more a registration body cracking it over title usage rather than the problems he's addressing.
I think it's more the state of Oregon cracking it over a citizen getting uppity.
Unmanaged switches? Just wait until the kids figure out that they can take down the entire network by plugging in both ends of an Ethernet cable to the wall jacks.
Public schools don't pay for IT infrastructure. E-Rate does. On your phone bill is a line item for universal access or universal service. Those fees fund the E-Rate program. Schools can get reimbursed, based on the portion of students that qualify for free or reduced lunches, for technology and as long as they go towards educational purposes, with some exceptions. If 90% of the students qualify for free or reduced lunch, the school is reimbursed 90% of the project cost. The gotcha is that the poorer districts get reimbursed first, so once you get to the school districts with 60%, 50%, 40%, etc, the E-Rate funds are tapped out. Those school districts pass levies for classroom computers or whatever to pay for it.
Apple essentially abandoned the education market in the early to mid 2000's. I was working IT support at a school through the Apple resurgence and migration to Intel CPUs. The education discounts went from being very generous to 10%. No volume discounts, and they actively prohibited their dealers, who might be willing to work something out, from selling to schools. Any other PC manufacturer would knock of 40% with a purchase of 20 or more laptops. Apple's iPad managements tools were complicated and fraught with dead-ends and gotchas. From the get-go, Chromebooks were easy to manage and easy to reset to factory defaults, and were 1/4 the cost.
The only company I hated dealing with more than Apple was Adobe.
Our video department at work has moved on from Final Cut Pro to Premier. At this point, there is nothing our creative departments need that is Mac only. I am trying to convince them to switch to PC's for cost savings, improved manufacturer support, reduced compatibility issues, etc.
According to TFA, adding "editor.cursorBlinking": "solid" to the app's settings.json fixes the high CPU consumption. That makes me think there isn't anything more to it.
Culturally, it is acceptable for women to abuse men. When a man hits a woman most people are outraged. When a woman hits a man, most people laugh. There are plenty of examples caught on video.
The trouble with archival tapes, IMO, is that they last TOO long. By the time anyone realizes it's time to migrate the data, the equipment to read and process the tapes is nigh impossible to find.
"ZFS isn't even a filesystem for this age" - WTF does that even mean?
It means that even back when FAT was a johnny come lately it already had greater market penetration than ZFS. With decades behind it and broad market penetration today, there's good reason to believe it won't vanish with the advent of the next development in filesystem architecture. ZFS is likely to be a blip on the radar, a pause before the next innovation. Not what you want for an archival format.
Market penetration is nice, but is Fat even sufficient? FAT32 files are limited to a maximum of 4GB. That is a real issue for video files. There is ExFAT, but people barely know it exists. I have little faith it will be supported in 20 years. NTFS is better in all respects, other than the fact that only MS products officially support writing to it. ZFS is supported natively by BSD and Linux supports it with a driver. Lots of big storage vendors use it for their SAN file systems. Few file systems have such broad-based support.
Bit-rot is an issue inherent to any storage medium
Bit rot, aka corrupted data, is not inherent to correctly operating hardware. As implemented, you'll see tens of thousands of unreadable blocks on a hard disk before you see a single one in which data has been undetectably corrupted. Every single sector gets a checksum in hardware and if the checksum does not pass you get the famous Abort Retry Ignore. For most storage you get Forward Error Correction coding so that some number of bit errors can be corrected on read before having to throw an error.
When you see bit rot, the storage media is usually not at fault. More often the data passes through faulty non-parity ram, a noisy memory bus or an overheated controller and gets corrupted on its way to storage rather than getting corrupted at rest on the storage. It died when you used an overclocked piece of garbage to copy it from an old hard disk to a newer, bigger one.
How do you know your hardware is good? Diagnostics can not detect every problem, not to mention power failures, dodgy power supplies, and cosmic rays triggering random bit flips. In addition, as storage densities get higher, magnetic domains are compressed, magnetic boundary migration is accelerated, and data life expectancy is reduced. With software calculated checksums and write verification you can get protection against data transfer errors and verify that your data at rest is still correct. When I archive data I take these precautions. You can choose a filesystem that supports these functions or you can use a combination of software products to do the same job. Pick your poison.
Netflix's peering deal is that they will enter into a no-cost peering agreement with ISP's and place caching devices in said ISP's datacenters to service Netflix customers who are subscribers of the aforementioned ISP's. This has the benefit of minimizing bandwidth costs for everyone. Netflix pays less to the content delivery networks and tier 1 backbone providers, and the ISP's pay less to the tier 1 backbone providers for data transfer charges. It's a win-win. However, Comcast resists this because Netflix competes with their cable TV offerings and on-demand video services. They refuse this deal for strategic reasons.
But, that's not what the parent AC poster was talking about. When customers pay for an Internet connection, they expect to get reasonably good access to all the Internet has to offer based on the connection speed they pay for. If the fees an ISP collects is not enough, they should charge their ISP customers more. ISP's should not deliberately degrade throughput from an Internet based service, lie about the cause for the degradation, and then shake down the Internet service to pay for improved throughput. That kind of behavior looks a whole lot like extortion and racketeering, and it is exactly what Comcast did to Netflix. Don't forget that over half of US broadband customers are Comcast users. Netflix can not afford to write off that many customers as unservicable.
Extortion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Extortion (also called shakedown, outwrestling, and exaction) is a criminal offense of obtaining money, property, or services from an individual or institution, through coercion.
Racket (crime) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... A racket is a service that is fraudulently offered to solve a problem, such as for a problem that does not exist, that will not be put into effect, or that would not otherwise exist if the racket did not exist. Conducting a racket is racketeering.
The problem is that HTTP is a shitty protocol. It uses an unique TCP connection for every request. For each page of text and every image, HTTP requests a new TCP connection and tears it down after transfer. This causes a lot of latency, partly because TCP is designed to start slow and ramp up to the available bandwidth and partly because of the extra signalling for new TCP handshakes, authentication tokens, encryption renegotiation, etc. As a result, your web browser spends way more time than it should just waiting for data transfers to start. In response to HTTP's limitations, web browser make parallel server connections to conceal some of that latency. Users on slow or congested links may find it beneficial to tweak their browser settings for fewer concurrent connections and/or longer timeouts. HTTP2 fixes many of these problems, but server support has been slow to roll out.
In their complaint, "the Plaintiffs analogize this practice of facial scanning to the collection of fingerprint data without the consent of the users." My understanding of the process is that the player must deliberately allow their face to be scanned, "Gamers get close to the camera and slowly turn their heads to the left and right while the camera scans their face. The face scanning process takes about 15 minutes to complete, according to the biometric data class action lawsuit." It seems unlikely that the user did not consent to this, only that they see an opportunity and are trying to cash in on it. Is Take-Two's scan data detailed enough or precise enough to the level of sophistication to where it can be used to fool facial recognition?
Furthermore, the law is stupid. Who used facial recognition data for security? Retinal scans? Sure. Iris? Maybe. But facial geometry? A handful of pictures of any person is enough to extrapolate their facial geometry.
I agree that what Disney did was probably legal, in the strictest interpretation of the term "legal". But, it is illegal to hire an H1-B visa holder for a position that can be filled by a qualified American, and it is is illegal to displace an American worker with an h1-B visa holder. I presume that "American" includes permanent residents as well as US citizens. If anyone broke the law, it it would have been the contracting companies, HCL and Cognizant
They would likely still be starving if they sold out. By my estimation, signing a contract infinitesimally increases your odds of hitting it big, but your odds of making a living go down significantly.
100% of Spotify users are there for the music? Surely you jest. Most Spotify users are there for background noise to drown out the sounds of coworkers.
Everyone hates the RIAA, but the fact is without the marketing by these entities you would never have found your "favorite" bands. Of course, out will come the people saying I am stupid (or a troll), and protesting that they like their favorite indie band because they heard them in a bar, Youtube, from a friend, etc. But the reality is that 99% of music is heard because of marketing. Period.
I'm not going to insult you, but I will protest.
Yeah, 99% of what is heard is from marketing, but it's still the same 10 hottest bands that sound exactly like the last 10 hottest bands who sounded exactly like the previous 10 hottest bands. Marketers don't take risks, and they don't care about putting out a good product. They just repackage the latest, generally pleasing band's stuff and ignore everything else. Different is unpredictable. Unpredictable is bad because they might not hit their target sales figures.
Apple doesn't want to compete on price. Now that competitors have caught up on ease of use, they undercut Apple's prices. Apple doesn't want to compromise on profit margins.
Apple used to focus on vertical integration. They wanted you to have an Apple computer, Apple iPod, Apple camera, Apple TV, Apple iTunes, Apple Printer, Apple everything, all working together seamlessly. Apple has changed direction and are abandoning less profitable market segments to focus on iPhones.
That's more of an installation problem. Gutters are supposed to be mounted lower than the roof's plane. The idea is that any ice and snow sloughing off the roof will be carried past the gutter by momentum. Water, on the other hand, falls mostly straight down from the roof edge.
There are some benefits to DST, but the preponderance of medical and energy policy research I've seen shows that DST has a net negative effect.
We have also been living with DST so long, that I'd wager that most businesses have adjusted their hours to open later than they would have otherwise, so the extra hour of daylight after work has effectively been nullified. I have not been able to find a good source of numbers for business opening/closing times before DST was implemented, but according to Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/science/daylight.asp) "far fewer businesses stayed open into the later evening hours, so most people tended to rise and retire earlier than they do today, negating the practicality of shifting an hour's worth of daylight away from early morning." You can't fool the body with a clock change alone. People's circadian rhythms follow light, not a clock. I suspect that a fair portion of the reason that people stay up "later" these days is that the clocks are wrong.
If Ben Franklin wanted to have more daylight, he should have just set his own alarm clock ahead and left the rest of us the hell alone!
Slashdot Mirror
I think you confuse intent with motivation. Punishment should fit the crime, not the motivation. To do so is a step towards thought crime. I'm not saying it's a slippery slope. I'm saying it's just wrong.
Murder is the crime of killing someone with intent. Whether I kill someone because they slept with my wife or because I owe them money, it is the same crime. If I kill someone because I hate them for their their race or because of a grudge, why should one act be a hate crime and the other not?
That wasn't my experience. Worry about fitting in? Not really. I always had a few good friends growing up, and that was all I cared about. Even so, I learned to listen and not make an ass of myself, so existing in a room of strangers or vague acquaintances wasn't a problem for me. Sure, I had a few bullies to deal with, but most of them were poor souls who were themselves bullied and thought I would be an easy target. I wasn't. Neurotic? I believe I was less neurotic than the majority of my classmates who fretted over their popularity.
https://www.xkcd.com/793/
P.S. I was a physics major, once upon a time.
P.P.S I am guilty of having done what is portrayed in that comic.
P.P.P.S I had a physic prof comment on me looking down on chemistry, "as you should." I *think* the comment was tongue-in-cheek.
You may recall the time Schrodinger was pulled over for speeding and the officer asked to search the vehicle. Having nothing to hide, Schrodinger consented. When the officer opened the trunk he found a dead cat and asked, "Did you know you have a dead cat in your trunk?" Schrodinger replied indignantly, "Well, I do now!"
The law in question can be find here
(From https://www.oregonlegislature....)
I am not a lawyer. This is my Layman's opinion.
I have been reading the law in question and the complaint in attempts to argue against you... but I can not. The Oregon law literately says that a person can't refer to themselves an "engineer" in Oregon without the appropriate certifications. What a ridiculous fucking law.
He is an engineer just not registered in their state from the previous Slashdot post. Think it's more a registration body cracking it over title usage rather than the problems he's addressing.
I think it's more the state of Oregon cracking it over a citizen getting uppity.
Unmanaged switches? Just wait until the kids figure out that they can take down the entire network by plugging in both ends of an Ethernet cable to the wall jacks.
Public schools don't pay for IT infrastructure. E-Rate does. On your phone bill is a line item for universal access or universal service. Those fees fund the E-Rate program. Schools can get reimbursed, based on the portion of students that qualify for free or reduced lunches, for technology and as long as they go towards educational purposes, with some exceptions. If 90% of the students qualify for free or reduced lunch, the school is reimbursed 90% of the project cost. The gotcha is that the poorer districts get reimbursed first, so once you get to the school districts with 60%, 50%, 40%, etc, the E-Rate funds are tapped out. Those school districts pass levies for classroom computers or whatever to pay for it.
Also, nobody ever pays list.
Apple essentially abandoned the education market in the early to mid 2000's. I was working IT support at a school through the Apple resurgence and migration to Intel CPUs. The education discounts went from being very generous to 10%. No volume discounts, and they actively prohibited their dealers, who might be willing to work something out, from selling to schools. Any other PC manufacturer would knock of 40% with a purchase of 20 or more laptops. Apple's iPad managements tools were complicated and fraught with dead-ends and gotchas. From the get-go, Chromebooks were easy to manage and easy to reset to factory defaults, and were 1/4 the cost.
The only company I hated dealing with more than Apple was Adobe.
Our video department at work has moved on from Final Cut Pro to Premier. At this point, there is nothing our creative departments need that is Mac only. I am trying to convince them to switch to PC's for cost savings, improved manufacturer support, reduced compatibility issues, etc.
According to TFA, adding "editor.cursorBlinking": "solid" to the app's settings.json fixes the high CPU consumption. That makes me think there isn't anything more to it.
Culturally, it is acceptable for women to abuse men. When a man hits a woman most people are outraged. When a woman hits a man, most people laugh. There are plenty of examples caught on video.
For example: https://www.google.com/search?...
The trouble with archival tapes, IMO, is that they last TOO long. By the time anyone realizes it's time to migrate the data, the equipment to read and process the tapes is nigh impossible to find.
"ZFS isn't even a filesystem for this age" - WTF does that even mean?
It means that even back when FAT was a johnny come lately it already had greater market penetration than ZFS. With decades behind it and broad market penetration today, there's good reason to believe it won't vanish with the advent of the next development in filesystem architecture. ZFS is likely to be a blip on the radar, a pause before the next innovation. Not what you want for an archival format.
Market penetration is nice, but is Fat even sufficient? FAT32 files are limited to a maximum of 4GB. That is a real issue for video files. There is ExFAT, but people barely know it exists. I have little faith it will be supported in 20 years. NTFS is better in all respects, other than the fact that only MS products officially support writing to it. ZFS is supported natively by BSD and Linux supports it with a driver. Lots of big storage vendors use it for their SAN file systems. Few file systems have such broad-based support.
Bit-rot is an issue inherent to any storage medium
Bit rot, aka corrupted data, is not inherent to correctly operating hardware. As implemented, you'll see tens of thousands of unreadable blocks on a hard disk before you see a single one in which data has been undetectably corrupted. Every single sector gets a checksum in hardware and if the checksum does not pass you get the famous Abort Retry Ignore. For most storage you get Forward Error Correction coding so that some number of bit errors can be corrected on read before having to throw an error.
When you see bit rot, the storage media is usually not at fault. More often the data passes through faulty non-parity ram, a noisy memory bus or an overheated controller and gets corrupted on its way to storage rather than getting corrupted at rest on the storage. It died when you used an overclocked piece of garbage to copy it from an old hard disk to a newer, bigger one.
How do you know your hardware is good? Diagnostics can not detect every problem, not to mention power failures, dodgy power supplies, and cosmic rays triggering random bit flips. In addition, as storage densities get higher, magnetic domains are compressed, magnetic boundary migration is accelerated, and data life expectancy is reduced. With software calculated checksums and write verification you can get protection against data transfer errors and verify that your data at rest is still correct. When I archive data I take these precautions. You can choose a filesystem that supports these functions or you can use a combination of software products to do the same job. Pick your poison.
Alright - one more time.
Netflix's peering deal is that they will enter into a no-cost peering agreement with ISP's and place caching devices in said ISP's datacenters to service Netflix customers who are subscribers of the aforementioned ISP's. This has the benefit of minimizing bandwidth costs for everyone. Netflix pays less to the content delivery networks and tier 1 backbone providers, and the ISP's pay less to the tier 1 backbone providers for data transfer charges. It's a win-win. However, Comcast resists this because Netflix competes with their cable TV offerings and on-demand video services. They refuse this deal for strategic reasons.
But, that's not what the parent AC poster was talking about. When customers pay for an Internet connection, they expect to get reasonably good access to all the Internet has to offer based on the connection speed they pay for. If the fees an ISP collects is not enough, they should charge their ISP customers more. ISP's should not deliberately degrade throughput from an Internet based service, lie about the cause for the degradation, and then shake down the Internet service to pay for improved throughput. That kind of behavior looks a whole lot like extortion and racketeering, and it is exactly what Comcast did to Netflix. Don't forget that over half of US broadband customers are Comcast users. Netflix can not afford to write off that many customers as unservicable.
Extortion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Extortion (also called shakedown, outwrestling, and exaction) is a criminal offense of obtaining money, property, or services from an individual or institution, through coercion.
Racket (crime) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
A racket is a service that is fraudulently offered to solve a problem, such as for a problem that does not exist, that will not be put into effect, or that would not otherwise exist if the racket did not exist. Conducting a racket is racketeering.
The problem is that HTTP is a shitty protocol. It uses an unique TCP connection for every request. For each page of text and every image, HTTP requests a new TCP connection and tears it down after transfer. This causes a lot of latency, partly because TCP is designed to start slow and ramp up to the available bandwidth and partly because of the extra signalling for new TCP handshakes, authentication tokens, encryption renegotiation, etc. As a result, your web browser spends way more time than it should just waiting for data transfers to start. In response to HTTP's limitations, web browser make parallel server connections to conceal some of that latency. Users on slow or congested links may find it beneficial to tweak their browser settings for fewer concurrent connections and/or longer timeouts. HTTP2 fixes many of these problems, but server support has been slow to roll out.
https://www.w3.org/Protocols/H...
In their complaint, "the Plaintiffs analogize this practice of facial scanning to the collection of fingerprint data without the consent of the users." My understanding of the process is that the player must deliberately allow their face to be scanned, "Gamers get close to the camera and slowly turn their heads to the left and right while the camera scans their face. The face scanning process takes about 15 minutes to complete, according to the biometric data class action lawsuit." It seems unlikely that the user did not consent to this, only that they see an opportunity and are trying to cash in on it. Is Take-Two's scan data detailed enough or precise enough to the level of sophistication to where it can be used to fool facial recognition?
http://heitnerlegal.com/2016/0...
https://topclassactions.com/la...
Furthermore, the law is stupid. Who used facial recognition data for security? Retinal scans? Sure. Iris? Maybe. But facial geometry? A handful of pictures of any person is enough to extrapolate their facial geometry.
I agree that what Disney did was probably legal, in the strictest interpretation of the term "legal". But, it is illegal to hire an H1-B visa holder for a position that can be filled by a qualified American, and it is is illegal to displace an American worker with an h1-B visa holder. I presume that "American" includes permanent residents as well as US citizens. If anyone broke the law, it it would have been the contracting companies, HCL and Cognizant
They would likely still be starving if they sold out. By my estimation, signing a contract infinitesimally increases your odds of hitting it big, but your odds of making a living go down significantly.
100% of Spotify users are there for the music? Surely you jest. Most Spotify users are there for background noise to drown out the sounds of coworkers.
You have a point, but I think it's been covered elsewhere already.
RIAA Bans Telling Friends About Songs
http://www.theonion.com/articl...
Everyone hates the RIAA, but the fact is without the marketing by these entities you would never have found your "favorite" bands. Of course, out will come the people saying I am stupid (or a troll), and protesting that they like their favorite indie band because they heard them in a bar, Youtube, from a friend, etc. But the reality is that 99% of music is heard because of marketing. Period.
I'm not going to insult you, but I will protest.
Yeah, 99% of what is heard is from marketing, but it's still the same 10 hottest bands that sound exactly like the last 10 hottest bands who sounded exactly like the previous 10 hottest bands. Marketers don't take risks, and they don't care about putting out a good product. They just repackage the latest, generally pleasing band's stuff and ignore everything else. Different is unpredictable. Unpredictable is bad because they might not hit their target sales figures.
Apple doesn't want to compete on price. Now that competitors have caught up on ease of use, they undercut Apple's prices. Apple doesn't want to compromise on profit margins.
Apple used to focus on vertical integration. They wanted you to have an Apple computer, Apple iPod, Apple camera, Apple TV, Apple iTunes, Apple Printer, Apple everything, all working together seamlessly. Apple has changed direction and are abandoning less profitable market segments to focus on iPhones.
That's more of an installation problem. Gutters are supposed to be mounted lower than the roof's plane. The idea is that any ice and snow sloughing off the roof will be carried past the gutter by momentum. Water, on the other hand, falls mostly straight down from the roof edge.
I see your article and raise you another.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There are some benefits to DST, but the preponderance of medical and energy policy research I've seen shows that DST has a net negative effect.
We have also been living with DST so long, that I'd wager that most businesses have adjusted their hours to open later than they would have otherwise, so the extra hour of daylight after work has effectively been nullified. I have not been able to find a good source of numbers for business opening/closing times before DST was implemented, but according to Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/science/daylight.asp) "far fewer businesses stayed open into the later evening hours, so most people tended to rise and retire earlier than they do today, negating the practicality of shifting an hour's worth of daylight away from early morning." You can't fool the body with a clock change alone. People's circadian rhythms follow light, not a clock. I suspect that a fair portion of the reason that people stay up "later" these days is that the clocks are wrong.
If Ben Franklin wanted to have more daylight, he should have just set his own alarm clock ahead and left the rest of us the hell alone!