My work provided me with one of these as their standard standing solution. It's not motorized, but it has pistons to assist raising/lowering that makes it relatively easy. Changing positions takes about 30s as I have to move my keyboard and mouse from the keyboard tray to the adjustable work surface.
The only cons are that it takes a bit of time to get set up correctly as you have to place a couple of stop screws to set the maximum height. It's also a little difficult to adjust the horizontal spacing on the monitor mounts (I have a 2-display setup). Other than that, it works great!
Secondly, it's only available on networks you choose to allow this on.
I don't have any choice. If I give my friend my WiFi password, and he happens to be running a Windows 10 phone, suddenly my WiFi password is shared with all of his contacts. So now every time someone is over my house and asks for the WiFi I'll have to ask them if they currently own, or ever intend to own a windows phone. And then, assuming they understand the question, I have to sound like a paranoid asshole and say "no" if they answer in the affirmative. My other option is to rename mySSID to end in _optout and update all of my devices because Microsoft chose to implement a ludicrous, criminally insecure, "feature"?
Third, yes, your wifi passwords are being backed up to make it easier when you migrate devices - Apple, Google and Microsoft all do this on your mobile devices. This isn't new!
Apple's encryption is end-to-end. They do not hold the encryption keys and thus can't share your passwords with anyone: Even if some brain dead middle manager had the idea to clone this feature, it would be impossible for them to implement without totally changing their security model.
While not drones per se, there are ground based weapons systems that are capable of automatically engaging human targets. Whether they are deployed in this configuration is probably something that the users aren't advertising.
Out of your two examples, Hulu is the only service that still shows commercials to their paying subscribers. Netflix doesn't (yet).
What other streaming services are there that will still show ads to paying subscribers? Because the only other ones that I am aware of (Crunchyroll, Funimation's streaming service, and as far as I am aware, Amazon) all stream ad-free to their paying subscribers.
I just bought a season of Archer from Amazon (I am also a Prime subscriber), and I was dismayed to find out that each episode is bracketed by 2-5 minutes of trailers for other FX shows.
This would really only affect languages like Java that mix interface declarations with their implementations.
Languages that normally separate them (like C, and C++) will not likely need to worry.
Lesson: Avoid Java
It's only been since Java 1.8 that you've been able to inline a default implementation along with an interface declaration. Before 1.8, the only legal members of interfaces were abstract method declarations and static final constants.
Assuming you already have svn installed and copy of Apache httpd with mod_dav_svn and you are are running on some flavor of *NIX.
Create an svn repository somewhere, eg. # svnadmin create/opt/svn-repo
Create a password for your repo, replace username and password as appropriate # htpasswd/opt/svn-repo/conf/htpasswd USERNAME PASSWORD # chmod 640/opt/svn-repo/conf/htpasswd
Fix the permissions of the repo so that the user that httpd runs as can write to the repo database. Replace www with whatever the appropriate user is: # cd/opt/svn-repo # chgrp -R www . # chmod -R g+r . # chmod -R g+rwX db locks # find db locks -type d -exec chmod g+s '{}' ';'
Open httpd.conf and add/uncomment the following lines in the LoadModule section:
Restart apache and then test your config:
# svn ls http://localhost/repo --username USERNAME --password PASSWORD --no-auth-cache
#
No errors means everything is working.
See the manual for instructions on mounting the WebDAV share with various clients. Note that Windows is kind of problematic for this out of the box and you may need to use a third party file system driver such as NetDrive.
Are you suggesting poisoning people? That seems absurd.
But we do it for other products. We poison industrial ethanol so the government doesn't tax it at the recreational rate. We spike opioid analgesics with non-therapeuticly high levels of acetaminophen to discourage recreational use. If we're willing to poison things that are sold legitimately, why wouldn't we poison something that is illegal? I'm not saying it wouldn't work for other reasons you cited, but we've already stepped over the line as a society of intentionally poisoning things to discourage their use.
Traditional pilots don't "feel the impact" more, but it does cost a great deal more, and introduce a lot mroe risk, to operate an aircraft with them on board. You seem to prefer that, for some reason. Strange.
It's not that strange. More risk means there is a higher threshold for committing violence.
FDA has decided a lot of things, many of which turned out not to be true. According to the FDA, Walnuts are a drug (yes it is true).
No it's not true. The FDA forced a walnut distributor to remove some unsubstantiated health claims from the packaging of their products: http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825.htm. People making false claims about the health benefits of their products (e.g. selling grain alcohol mixed with an emetic as cure-all) was the whole reason the FDA was created.
Walnuts are not classified as a drug, but if you claim they cure cancer without a good double blind study to back you up, you will be called on your bullshit. This is a good thing and is an example of a government agency exercising it's regulatory authority within the appropriate ambit. There are plenty of other real government conspiracies both covert and flagrant to worry about without inventing more.
Annoying Oracle can't be a bad thing. I can't believe they bundle it when Java is needed for so many enterprise apps - surely the reputational damage is worth more than the revenue from bundling the toolbar? It makes them look cheap and certainly not enterprise.
If you download the "server" JRE (actually it's a full JDK, I don't know why they label it that way), it comes as a simple tarball. It doesn't interact with the registry, doesn't install the browser plugin -- it's just full JDK distribution. I'm guessing they are locked into a multi-year co-marketing deal with Ask for the consumer distribution. I always just download the server version, unzip, and add C:\jdk1.x.y_z to my PATH and I'm done.
If you work for the Gov then this information should be public anyway. We pay your salary, we should know whats its going towards.
You have no idea what goes into an SF86 form, do you? It's your whole life for at least the past 7 years, including SSN, bank account numbers, past addresses, KAs, relatives. It'd be one-stop shopping for stealing every cleared persons identity if it were public. Also, not all cleared personnel are employed by the government.
We don't need any more secrecy, all that leads to asides from war in middle east countries is racist white cops shooting innocent blank teens.
Those are local cops, for the most part. If the local and state PDs were as thorough as the feds, we might have fewer issues as they might catch more potential problems through psych screening.
Doesn't the Linux kernel group hold a very similar stance in that you cannot use the kernels internal APIs without breaching copyright and thus falling under the GPL as a derivative work?
Using the API doesn't invoke the GPL -- it's actually the linking process. When you link against the kernel, your binary becomes a derivative work partially based on the kernel. Since the kernel is covered by the GPL, creating any derivative work from it requires you abide by the terms of the GPL. I doubt any FSF lawyer would have anything negative to say about cloning a project's public API in order to create a completely new implementation under a different license.
Another example: If I created a GPL program with an API that did not make it necessary to link against a library to use - e.g. you talked to my program via IPC or a wire protocol like SOAP, then you could utilize my API all you wanted without triggering the GPL. You could distribute your program that uses my API under whatever license you want.
This is why it's common for software that has a GPL server component to distribute the client driver libraries under the LGPL. Modifications the the server or the client driver itself must be shared, but programs that merely link to the driver may remain proprietary.
What's strange is that when another text is sent, the problem case solves itself and the messaging app becomes usable again.
It's not that weird. The IOS messaging app shows messages organized by sender with the most recent message summarized under each sender's name. If a message is being cropped incorrectly and causing the crash, then wh3n another message comes in from that sender, the new message will replace the problematic one in the summary.
Or one employee that believes in personal freedom, and also realizes that yeast produced opiates will shut down the cartels, hurt the Taliban, reduce violence, and pretty much make the world a better place... unless you are either a criminal or a cop.
Unless, of course, the government goes on a pogrom against any large scale yeast operation, in which case only organizations with the resources to operate one illicitly will be able to benefit: the cartels and the Taliban.
Would it be more efficient to launch an impactor from Earth to change the asteroid's trajectory or to launch a rocket (using the same rocket that would launch the impactor) carrying a second rocket that would attach to the asteroid and burn to similarly change its trajectory? An impactor would need to be calculated precisely in advance, while attaching a rocket would allow some room for error since its burn could be controlled remotely. The actual feat of getting the rocket to land and securely mount itself would be a challenge however. I don't think "blowing it up" is a good idea, but diversion if possible seems the least-risky and most-effective method.
Just my take, but: If you want to land on it instead of crashing, you have to carry a bunch of extra fuel to burn off the delta-V that got you there in the first place. If you have enough extra fuel to slow down, you might as well burn it getting there faster so you have more energy when you impact. Essentially if you slow down to land, you're wasting a bunch of energy in the form of the ship's momentum which you could be putting into changing the course of the asteroid.
Perhaps, but what they actually tend to do is look at the situation dispassionately and make utilitarian decisions that bring the most benefit to themselves.
Just make sure the organization's objectives are aligned with the interests of the leader. Star ship captains get promoted to admiral by completing their mission, not saving their friends. Generals advance in rank by winning battles. CEOs get their bonus by raising the stock price.
A psychopath CEO will see the fine associated with dumping toxins in a river is smaller than the increased profits to be realized by not disposing of chemicals legally: organization and CEO goals aligned. A person with a conscience will a) want to obey a reasonable law and b) have some moral qualms about potentially poisoning a bunch of people, regardless of whether it will be traced back to them.
Corporations are basically amoral, immortal, and wield an enormous amount of influence in politics. One of the best counterbalance is having someone of decent character in charge of them.
The problem is contracts generally have a statement of work saying what you will do and a date saying when you will deliver it by. If you don't accomplish the things in the SOW by the deadline, you don't get the $$$. Unless you are doing pure R&D, you rarely have the luxury of being as hand-wavy about the requirements as agile seems to want you to be.
I tend to agree. As a storage admin for a Multi-Hospital organization using anything open source is not really an option if we want to keep the HIPPA-potamus away.
I worked for over a decade as an SE for an org that was both a hospital-IT vendor and a covered entity in its own right (we sold a PMS, a PACS, operated multiple HIEs, and were a claims clearinghouse). When choosing libraries and server technology, never once was the open source status of a piece of technology a consideration with regards to HIPAA. We would occasionally have to run things by the legal team to evaluate a new license or check our compliance, but that was it. HIPAA considerations were mostly operational: Is PHI encrypted when at rest or transmitted over the open internet? Are we ensuring only authorized personnel can see PHI? How are we handling backups? The ops team took care of most of those things and they didn't care what we built the software out of, as long as it conformed to the requirements.
Another interesting question is whether there is increased risk when transferring control from the automated system to the human driver. I'd be curious to know if the two accidents with a human operator were in the moments immediately following a hand off of control. I imagine that it might take a few seconds to go from "passenger mode" to "driver mode" as you might not have the same level of situational awareness as when you are in control of the vehicle.
There are still plenty of clients out there that support neither SNI nor IP6, so the implication of everyone going to SSL is that everyone needs a static IP4 address. That sounds unsustainable to me.
Slashdot Mirror
If a soldier is expected to refuse an unlawful order, why not a cop?
My work provided me with one of these as their standard standing solution. It's not motorized, but it has pistons to assist raising/lowering that makes it relatively easy. Changing positions takes about 30s as I have to move my keyboard and mouse from the keyboard tray to the adjustable work surface.
The only cons are that it takes a bit of time to get set up correctly as you have to place a couple of stop screws to set the maximum height. It's also a little difficult to adjust the horizontal spacing on the monitor mounts (I have a 2-display setup). Other than that, it works great!
Secondly, it's only available on networks you choose to allow this on.
I don't have any choice. If I give my friend my WiFi password, and he happens to be running a Windows 10 phone, suddenly my WiFi password is shared with all of his contacts. So now every time someone is over my house and asks for the WiFi I'll have to ask them if they currently own, or ever intend to own a windows phone. And then, assuming they understand the question, I have to sound like a paranoid asshole and say "no" if they answer in the affirmative. My other option is to rename mySSID to end in _optout and update all of my devices because Microsoft chose to implement a ludicrous, criminally insecure, "feature"?
Third, yes, your wifi passwords are being backed up to make it easier when you migrate devices - Apple, Google and Microsoft all do this on your mobile devices. This isn't new!
Apple's encryption is end-to-end. They do not hold the encryption keys and thus can't share your passwords with anyone: Even if some brain dead middle manager had the idea to clone this feature, it would be impossible for them to implement without totally changing their security model.
Drones with weapons aren't autonomous.
While not drones per se, there are ground based weapons systems that are capable of automatically engaging human targets. Whether they are deployed in this configuration is probably something that the users aren't advertising.
Out of your two examples, Hulu is the only service that still shows commercials to their paying subscribers. Netflix doesn't (yet).
What other streaming services are there that will still show ads to paying subscribers? Because the only other ones that I am aware of (Crunchyroll, Funimation's streaming service, and as far as I am aware, Amazon) all stream ad-free to their paying subscribers.
I just bought a season of Archer from Amazon (I am also a Prime subscriber), and I was dismayed to find out that each episode is bracketed by 2-5 minutes of trailers for other FX shows.
This would really only affect languages like Java that mix interface declarations with their implementations.
Languages that normally separate them (like C, and C++) will not likely need to worry.
Lesson: Avoid Java
It's only been since Java 1.8 that you've been able to inline a default implementation along with an interface declaration. Before 1.8, the only legal members of interfaces were abstract method declarations and static final constants.
Everyone who's ever typed:
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
Better get their check books out and start sending royalties to Dennis Ritchie and/or AT&T.
Assuming you already have svn installed and copy of Apache httpd with mod_dav_svn and you are are running on some flavor of *NIX.
Create an svn repository somewhere, eg.
/opt/svn-repo
# svnadmin create
Create a password for your repo, replace username and password as appropriate
/opt/svn-repo/conf/htpasswd USERNAME PASSWORD /opt/svn-repo/conf/htpasswd
# htpasswd
# chmod 640
Fix the permissions of the repo so that the user that httpd runs as can write to the repo database. Replace www with whatever the appropriate user is:
/opt/svn-repo
# cd
# chgrp -R www .
# chmod -R g+r .
# chmod -R g+rwX db locks
# find db locks -type d -exec chmod g+s '{}' ';'
Open httpd.conf and add/uncomment the following lines in the LoadModule section:
LoadModule dav_module modules/mod_dav.so
LoadModule dav_svn_module modules/mod_dav_svn.so
At the very bottom of your httpd, add a location for your repository:
/repo> /opt/svn-repo
<Location
DAV svn
SVNPath
SVNAutoversioning on
AuthType Basic /opt/svn-repo/conf/htpasswd
AuthName "Subversion repository"
AuthUserFile
Require valid-user
</Location>
Restart apache and then test your config:
# svn ls http://localhost/repo --username USERNAME --password PASSWORD --no-auth-cache
#
No errors means everything is working.
See the manual for instructions on mounting the WebDAV share with various clients. Note that Windows is kind of problematic for this out of the box and you may need to use a third party file system driver such as NetDrive.
The Declaration of Independence is a piece of rhetoric and not a legal document.
Are you suggesting poisoning people? That seems absurd.
But we do it for other products. We poison industrial ethanol so the government doesn't tax it at the recreational rate. We spike opioid analgesics with non-therapeuticly high levels of acetaminophen to discourage recreational use. If we're willing to poison things that are sold legitimately, why wouldn't we poison something that is illegal? I'm not saying it wouldn't work for other reasons you cited, but we've already stepped over the line as a society of intentionally poisoning things to discourage their use.
Traditional pilots don't "feel the impact" more, but it does cost a great deal more, and introduce a lot mroe risk, to operate an aircraft with them on board. You seem to prefer that, for some reason. Strange.
It's not that strange. More risk means there is a higher threshold for committing violence.
FDA has decided a lot of things, many of which turned out not to be true. According to the FDA, Walnuts are a drug (yes it is true).
No it's not true. The FDA forced a walnut distributor to remove some unsubstantiated health claims from the packaging of their products: http://www.fda.gov/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/ucm202825.htm. People making false claims about the health benefits of their products (e.g. selling grain alcohol mixed with an emetic as cure-all) was the whole reason the FDA was created.
Walnuts are not classified as a drug, but if you claim they cure cancer without a good double blind study to back you up, you will be called on your bullshit. This is a good thing and is an example of a government agency exercising it's regulatory authority within the appropriate ambit. There are plenty of other real government conspiracies both covert and flagrant to worry about without inventing more.
Annoying Oracle can't be a bad thing. I can't believe they bundle it when Java is needed for so many enterprise apps - surely the reputational damage is worth more than the revenue from bundling the toolbar? It makes them look cheap and certainly not enterprise.
If you download the "server" JRE (actually it's a full JDK, I don't know why they label it that way), it comes as a simple tarball. It doesn't interact with the registry, doesn't install the browser plugin -- it's just full JDK distribution. I'm guessing they are locked into a multi-year co-marketing deal with Ask for the consumer distribution. I always just download the server version, unzip, and add C:\jdk1.x.y_z to my PATH and I'm done.
...in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university...
Was he walking through the school grounds or just passing by on the sidewalk? Big difference.
If you work for the Gov then this information should be public anyway. We pay your salary, we should know whats its going towards.
You have no idea what goes into an SF86 form, do you? It's your whole life for at least the past 7 years, including SSN, bank account numbers, past addresses, KAs, relatives. It'd be one-stop shopping for stealing every cleared persons identity if it were public. Also, not all cleared personnel are employed by the government.
We don't need any more secrecy, all that leads to asides from war in middle east countries is racist white cops shooting innocent blank teens.
Those are local cops, for the most part. If the local and state PDs were as thorough as the feds, we might have fewer issues as they might catch more potential problems through psych screening.
Doesn't the Linux kernel group hold a very similar stance in that you cannot use the kernels internal APIs without breaching copyright and thus falling under the GPL as a derivative work?
Using the API doesn't invoke the GPL -- it's actually the linking process. When you link against the kernel, your binary becomes a derivative work partially based on the kernel. Since the kernel is covered by the GPL, creating any derivative work from it requires you abide by the terms of the GPL. I doubt any FSF lawyer would have anything negative to say about cloning a project's public API in order to create a completely new implementation under a different license.
Another example: If I created a GPL program with an API that did not make it necessary to link against a library to use - e.g. you talked to my program via IPC or a wire protocol like SOAP, then you could utilize my API all you wanted without triggering the GPL. You could distribute your program that uses my API under whatever license you want.
This is why it's common for software that has a GPL server component to distribute the client driver libraries under the LGPL. Modifications the the server or the client driver itself must be shared, but programs that merely link to the driver may remain proprietary.
What's strange is that when another text is sent, the problem case solves itself and the messaging app becomes usable again.
It's not that weird. The IOS messaging app shows messages organized by sender with the most recent message summarized under each sender's name. If a message is being cropped incorrectly and causing the crash, then wh3n another message comes in from that sender, the new message will replace the problematic one in the summary.
Why do you think they would charge cars and trucks the same? It would be very easy to charge trucks more per mile.
Are they going to charge trucks 6000-9000 times what they charge cars? Because that's the difference in wear and tear on roads between the two.
Or one employee that believes in personal freedom, and also realizes that yeast produced opiates will shut down the cartels, hurt the Taliban, reduce violence, and pretty much make the world a better place ... unless you are either a criminal or a cop.
Unless, of course, the government goes on a pogrom against any large scale yeast operation, in which case only organizations with the resources to operate one illicitly will be able to benefit: the cartels and the Taliban.
Would it be more efficient to launch an impactor from Earth to change the asteroid's trajectory or to launch a rocket (using the same rocket that would launch the impactor) carrying a second rocket that would attach to the asteroid and burn to similarly change its trajectory? An impactor would need to be calculated precisely in advance, while attaching a rocket would allow some room for error since its burn could be controlled remotely. The actual feat of getting the rocket to land and securely mount itself would be a challenge however. I don't think "blowing it up" is a good idea, but diversion if possible seems the least-risky and most-effective method.
Just my take, but: If you want to land on it instead of crashing, you have to carry a bunch of extra fuel to burn off the delta-V that got you there in the first place. If you have enough extra fuel to slow down, you might as well burn it getting there faster so you have more energy when you impact. Essentially if you slow down to land, you're wasting a bunch of energy in the form of the ship's momentum which you could be putting into changing the course of the asteroid.
Perhaps, but what they actually tend to do is look at the situation dispassionately and make utilitarian decisions that bring the most benefit to themselves.
Just make sure the organization's objectives are aligned with the interests of the leader. Star ship captains get promoted to admiral by completing their mission, not saving their friends. Generals advance in rank by winning battles. CEOs get their bonus by raising the stock price.
A psychopath CEO will see the fine associated with dumping toxins in a river is smaller than the increased profits to be realized by not disposing of chemicals legally: organization and CEO goals aligned. A person with a conscience will a) want to obey a reasonable law and b) have some moral qualms about potentially poisoning a bunch of people, regardless of whether it will be traced back to them.
Corporations are basically amoral, immortal, and wield an enormous amount of influence in politics. One of the best counterbalance is having someone of decent character in charge of them.
The problem is contracts generally have a statement of work saying what you will do and a date saying when you will deliver it by. If you don't accomplish the things in the SOW by the deadline, you don't get the $$$. Unless you are doing pure R&D, you rarely have the luxury of being as hand-wavy about the requirements as agile seems to want you to be.
I tend to agree. As a storage admin for a Multi-Hospital organization using anything open source is not really an option if we want to keep the HIPPA-potamus away.
I worked for over a decade as an SE for an org that was both a hospital-IT vendor and a covered entity in its own right (we sold a PMS, a PACS, operated multiple HIEs, and were a claims clearinghouse). When choosing libraries and server technology, never once was the open source status of a piece of technology a consideration with regards to HIPAA. We would occasionally have to run things by the legal team to evaluate a new license or check our compliance, but that was it. HIPAA considerations were mostly operational: Is PHI encrypted when at rest or transmitted over the open internet? Are we ensuring only authorized personnel can see PHI? How are we handling backups? The ops team took care of most of those things and they didn't care what we built the software out of, as long as it conformed to the requirements.
Another interesting question is whether there is increased risk when transferring control from the automated system to the human driver. I'd be curious to know if the two accidents with a human operator were in the moments immediately following a hand off of control. I imagine that it might take a few seconds to go from "passenger mode" to "driver mode" as you might not have the same level of situational awareness as when you are in control of the vehicle.
There are still plenty of clients out there that support neither SNI nor IP6, so the implication of everyone going to SSL is that everyone needs a static IP4 address. That sounds unsustainable to me.