I'm not color blind, and in an engineering field.
I can't read resistor values either, by the way.
That's why you put resistors in labelled boxes, and test them when using anyways.
As for network cable pairs, there are only 2 or 3 duties that require being able to distinguish the colors to do.....
A lot of people work in networking without ever needing to make a cable, punch something down, or actually examine the physical layer.
You could concentrate on protocol analysis instead.
There are no 'colors' to distinguish in the TCP IP protocol.
Or in a router config file.
As long as someone else is the person physically looking at the router, they can tell you what color the lights are, probably.
All the anecdote really proves is some color blind people are better at certain activities than some non color-blind people.
However, the non-colorblind people could probably use eyepieces with enhancement to remove color channels from their view.
And in most cases (other than that very special problem of detecting things adequately hidden only from color-sighted people), color blindness would be a major disadvantage
e.g.
I don't like the taste of government-issue daily nutritional staple #5623A5 (under the new upcoming nationalized grocery system), it tastes flavorless to me.
That's no problem... would you like staple food item #5623A5 to taste delicious to you just like it does to everyone else, instead of flavorless?
No problem, we'll alter your genes (blah blah)..bing.. done..
[Now, go enjoy your algae-coated seaweed].. Next?
My hair is a different color than everyone else's can you fix it?
Hair died! done... next?
Hi.... my family is descended from a different culture, our faces, skin, and voice look different from everyone elses', can you fix?
Ding... done! You look just like everyone else now...
etc...etc
Not that this is inherently immoral or anything.... it's just interesting.
People shouldn't all want to be the same, and they don't, it's really implausible, I think.
Color blindness, however, impairs actual function.
It's a handicap, and a disadvantage in terms of physical abilities, that can have many negative effects over one's life.
I've yet to hear of anyone being happy with being color blind, or having some actual advantage.
And i'll just want a debugger on mine, the ability to load user customized firmware, compilers, and a full development environment with remote link capabilities, that way I can load code on mine to wirelessly hack into other people's to control and see what they see, and take over control of their laser canons at will.
There's a simple solution to this.... the applicants pay a lot to get the certification already.
Use some of that money to hire more people to actually inspect the production line, pull hardware, and test.
His second wish should have been... I wish for an IRS tax auditor to show up right away and bill me for $15.2 million, and declare all taxes paid and settled when I pay that.
ER... P.S. I meant $7.49 million for the 2nd wish.. can't be that crule:)
He should have instead said... "I wish for every person who is my worst enemy to win $15 million right now."
Then his worst enemy's worst enemy (i.e. Mr Edelstein) would win $30 million right away.
His second wish should have been... I wish for an IRS tax auditor to show up right away and bill me for $15.2 million, and declare all taxes paid and settled when I pay that.
Then Mr Edelstein would have to pay $15.2 million.. but his worst enemy would owe double that......
That would be like Microsoft getting a complaint about the Internet Explorer icon being buried in the Start menu, instead of the Quick launch bar or Desktop, where the user was comfortable with it.
And (supposing drag and drop is not implemented) offering the work around
Start > Run > Cmd
shortcut -t "%programfiles%\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" -n "C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\Launch Internet Explorer.lnk"
Problem solved! Status: CLOSED, Resolution: INVALID / WONTFIX (see workaround)
See, when there is a workaround available, anyone who cares about having the icon on quicklaunch bar (even people who have limited/no internet access, and limited computer knowledge), will just know to search and find this bug, apply the workaround, and be done with it.
This is a future backdoor for enforcing upcoming ACTA, and for cracking down on file sharing/other perceived piracy/copyright infringements.
And ultimately for imposing global internet censorship (controls on perceived indecent or perceived dangerous content).
This isn't about hacker havens or real bad guys. Lobbyists aren't handling billions of bucks wanting representatives to shut down 'hacker havens'.
The big bucks are coming down from the **AA
Not that stopping crime is a bad thing.
But this sort of thing is going to be abused going forward.
It's contrary to free trade.
And while the current intent may be great, the future consequences could be dire, if some agreement can't be reached early to limit its scope.
The software browsers on most of the machines in the world operate with the ability to modify
any file in the host computer. Even if they are prevented from changing some files, it only
takes certain files to make the entire system untrustworthy.
Its broken. I love the web. But its broken by design.
What makes you think this design has anything to do with the web?
On a unix system, you can make a user just for browsing the web with, with no special permissions.
Have a script run every week to delete and re-create that user, scrapping all cookies and preferences files every time.
Then there's very little a web browser can change, really.
There's also nothing inherent about web browser technology that browsers have to have such permissions by disign -- or even anything by design that they have to provide silent cross-site object loading.
There's limited ability to automatically accept/reject off-site objects based on user expectations, true, but that doesn't mean the whole thing's broken
Unless it's a filter that simple lookup by IP already circumvents.
Or its a client-side filter/phishing site blocker that checks only the user-entered/user-clicked URL string against a blacklist (not the IP it resolves to)
A spinning disk cannot do an infinite number of read-write ops. There is some (very high) number of read-write ops it can do before the mechanical components, read-write heads will deteoriate or fail.
There is also some limit to the amount of time that spinning disk can be powered and spinning, before random failures can occur.
Also, that number is not precisely predictable, nor is it the same or necessarily similar for every hard drive. Sometimes mechanical failure of a spinning disk happens less than a year after its purchase.
Other disks last 10 years of the very same model.
At least with SSD failure that occur are probably not mechanical: they are more likely to do with a manufacturing defect in the electronics on the board, gamma radiation, EMP, or electrostatic discharge, than some random unpredictable event.
Actually... this just goes back to test your backups, regularly, make sure you read back and verify every bit on the medium.
Even if you use tape, you need to have two backups at all times anyways -- otherwise, what do you do for backups if your source media blows up in the middle of a backup, or starts spewing corrupt data (during read operations), giving you both an unusable source, and an unusable backup destination?
Yeah... that's actually encouraging, it means they are actually providing meaningful distinctive advise/suggestions, and not merely copy and pasting vendor vulnerability lists and activating pretty 'alert level' colors...
not like the US government, who yanked up what used to be the wonderful somewhat independent [but gov sponsored] organization called 'CERT', absorbed them into the department of homeland security, and turned them into US-CERT a mere vacant shadow of their former selves, just another clearinghose that lists every bloody little Windows vulnerability the earth has ever known, nothing too interesting, nothing too distinctive or useful anymore.
That is, ever since, CERT's usefulness has plummeted by orders of magnitude, nowadays they typically just parrot all the major commercial vendors' security advisories, even ridiculously minor ones --- I suppose this is great if you are a Windows user, it should convince you to switch, but for the rest of us it sucks.....
CERT has made what, 1 activity incident report based on actual events or compromises, intrusion patterns, intrusion details, or reports on new types of threats since 2001?
Governments don't know what to do about security, I guess... their efforts at 'reporting' just degenerate into vulnerability listing, and other mundane non-intelligence-requiring activity.
Either that or they think it's too dangerous to tell the public what direction attacks/bad guys seem to be heading.
Um... they actually ever made laptops or desktops with full-sized RCA jacks ?
I've actually never seen one of those on a computer, ever, except possibly on a high-end sound card designed for stereo hookups.
Mini-RCA for audio in and out is almost universal in the computing world
There are some digital and optical audio in/out options, but they never seem to have caught on in PCs, probably because they're too expensive -- and the average PC user is just looking to hook up a pair of $5 speakers, a $0.30 microphone, and maybe an input from another soundcard or juke box.
X Out of stock - This product is not available for purchase at this time.
If the OP is correct about line-in being on the
verge of extinction, then I guess they would be out of stock forever... queue up the conspiracy theories now:-)
Unfortunately it may be in part an explanation for the downfall of Unix on the desktop (and for the success of Unix in the datacenter).
Nothing too weird or fancy means you can't impress people much either, since, well, fancy things are usually what commercial OSes provide:)
One of the major ways consumers are convinced to install a piece of software, or buy something is because it does something fancy, looks cool, or has these sophisticated features, in a way that shows it has this advantage over the competition.
As long as Unix has none of that to offer by default readily accessible out of the box, it will be at a disadvantage.
But it does mean the result is probably more stable (nothing fancy = reduced complexity = fewer bugs)
3. Convince the maintainer to fix it the way you like it.
Which is exactly what they are trying to do, by using very strong words, demands, and trying to get a 'vote' to convince the maintainer that their position is popular and the maintainer should fix it.
Even if Open source isn't a democracy, the results of a vote/study should be persuasive, provided the study was conducted in a fair unbiased way that didn't allow supporters to self-select (since apathetic users who liked the change would be less likely to show up at a 'vote' about undoing the change -- in fact, the vocal minority opposing a certain design change might get more votes their way, due only to the fact that more of the opponents are concerned about the matter, and supporters barely notice a vote is going on).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not color blind, and in an engineering field. I can't read resistor values either, by the way.
That's why you put resistors in labelled boxes, and test them when using anyways.
As for network cable pairs, there are only 2 or 3 duties that require being able to distinguish the colors to do.....
A lot of people work in networking without ever needing to make a cable, punch something down, or actually examine the physical layer.
You could concentrate on protocol analysis instead.
There are no 'colors' to distinguish in the TCP IP protocol.
Or in a router config file. As long as someone else is the person physically looking at the router, they can tell you what color the lights are, probably.
Sample size of 1.
All the anecdote really proves is some color blind people are better at certain activities than some non color-blind people.
However, the non-colorblind people could probably use eyepieces with enhancement to remove color channels from their view.
And in most cases (other than that very special problem of detecting things adequately hidden only from color-sighted people), color blindness would be a major disadvantage
Ah... great... next we'll have tastes:
e.g. I don't like the taste of government-issue daily nutritional staple #5623A5 (under the new upcoming nationalized grocery system), it tastes flavorless to me.
That's no problem... would you like staple food item #5623A5 to taste delicious to you just like it does to everyone else, instead of flavorless?
No problem, we'll alter your genes (blah blah)..bing.. done..
[Now, go enjoy your algae-coated seaweed].. Next?
My hair is a different color than everyone else's can you fix it? Hair died! done... next?
Hi.... my family is descended from a different culture, our faces, skin, and voice look different from everyone elses', can you fix?
Ding... done! You look just like everyone else now...
etc...etc
Not that this is inherently immoral or anything.... it's just interesting. People shouldn't all want to be the same, and they don't, it's really implausible, I think.
Color blindness, however, impairs actual function. It's a handicap, and a disadvantage in terms of physical abilities, that can have many negative effects over one's life.
I've yet to hear of anyone being happy with being color blind, or having some actual advantage.
And i'll just want a debugger on mine, the ability to load user customized firmware, compilers, and a full development environment with remote link capabilities, that way I can load code on mine to wirelessly hack into other people's to control and see what they see, and take over control of their laser canons at will.
There's a simple solution to this.... the applicants pay a lot to get the certification already. Use some of that money to hire more people to actually inspect the production line, pull hardware, and test.
Ah, but they are energy efficient.............. compared to a short circuit, or a 100 ohm resistor in parallel with the device.
I guess the secret's out about my Energy Star certified gas-guzzling SUV that gets 10mpg, which I drive a few hundred miles every day?
His second wish should have been... I wish for an IRS tax auditor to show up right away and bill me for $15.2 million, and declare all taxes paid and settled when I pay that.
ER... P.S. I meant $7.49 million for the 2nd wish.. can't be that crule :)
He should have instead said... "I wish for every person who is my worst enemy to win $15 million right now."
Then his worst enemy's worst enemy (i.e. Mr Edelstein) would win $30 million right away.
His second wish should have been... I wish for an IRS tax auditor to show up right away and bill me for $15.2 million, and declare all taxes paid and settled when I pay that.
Then Mr Edelstein would have to pay $15.2 million.. but his worst enemy would owe double that......
Hm... so perhaps it makes sense to attribute software you write to your worst enemy (instead of you), if the software is likely to be controversial?
That way it'll be your worst enemy (whose name is on and in the software) that they try to sue, instead of you
GoDaddy could always raise their prices for Chinese users to make up for the increase in cost, instead of banning them entirely.
That would be like Microsoft getting a complaint about the Internet Explorer icon being buried in the Start menu, instead of the Quick launch bar or Desktop, where the user was comfortable with it.
And (supposing drag and drop is not implemented) offering the work around
Start > Run > Cmd
shortcut -t "%programfiles%\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" -n "C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Quick Launch\Launch Internet Explorer.lnk"
Problem solved! Status: CLOSED, Resolution: INVALID / WONTFIX (see workaround)
See, when there is a workaround available, anyone who cares about having the icon on quicklaunch bar (even people who have limited/no internet access, and limited computer knowledge), will just know to search and find this bug, apply the workaround, and be done with it.
This is a future backdoor for enforcing upcoming ACTA, and for cracking down on file sharing/other perceived piracy/copyright infringements. And ultimately for imposing global internet censorship (controls on perceived indecent or perceived dangerous content).
This isn't about hacker havens or real bad guys. Lobbyists aren't handling billions of bucks wanting representatives to shut down 'hacker havens'.
The big bucks are coming down from the **AA
Not that stopping crime is a bad thing. But this sort of thing is going to be abused going forward.
It's contrary to free trade. And while the current intent may be great, the future consequences could be dire, if some agreement can't be reached early to limit its scope.
The software browsers on most of the machines in the world operate with the ability to modify
any file in the host computer. Even if they are prevented from changing some files, it only takes certain files to make the entire system untrustworthy.
Its broken. I love the web. But its broken by design.
What makes you think this design has anything to do with the web?
On a unix system, you can make a user just for browsing the web with, with no special permissions.
Have a script run every week to delete and re-create that user, scrapping all cookies and preferences files every time.
Then there's very little a web browser can change, really.
There's also nothing inherent about web browser technology that browsers have to have such permissions by disign -- or even anything by design that they have to provide silent cross-site object loading.
There's limited ability to automatically accept/reject off-site objects based on user expectations, true, but that doesn't mean the whole thing's broken
Unless it's a filter that simple lookup by IP already circumvents. Or its a client-side filter/phishing site blocker that checks only the user-entered/user-clicked URL string against a blacklist (not the IP it resolves to)
A spinning disk cannot do an infinite number of read-write ops. There is some (very high) number of read-write ops it can do before the mechanical components, read-write heads will deteoriate or fail.
There is also some limit to the amount of time that spinning disk can be powered and spinning, before random failures can occur.
Also, that number is not precisely predictable, nor is it the same or necessarily similar for every hard drive. Sometimes mechanical failure of a spinning disk happens less than a year after its purchase.
Other disks last 10 years of the very same model.
At least with SSD failure that occur are probably not mechanical: they are more likely to do with a manufacturing defect in the electronics on the board, gamma radiation, EMP, or electrostatic discharge, than some random unpredictable event.
Actually... this just goes back to test your backups, regularly, make sure you read back and verify every bit on the medium.
Even if you use tape, you need to have two backups at all times anyways -- otherwise, what do you do for backups if your source media blows up in the middle of a backup, or starts spewing corrupt data (during read operations), giving you both an unusable source, and an unusable backup destination?
Yeah... that's actually encouraging, it means they are actually providing meaningful distinctive advise/suggestions, and not merely copy and pasting vendor vulnerability lists and activating pretty 'alert level' colors...
not like the US government, who yanked up what used to be the wonderful somewhat independent [but gov sponsored] organization called 'CERT', absorbed them into the department of homeland security, and turned them into US-CERT a mere vacant shadow of their former selves, just another clearinghose that lists every bloody little Windows vulnerability the earth has ever known, nothing too interesting, nothing too distinctive or useful anymore.
That is, ever since, CERT's usefulness has plummeted by orders of magnitude, nowadays they typically just parrot all the major commercial vendors' security advisories, even ridiculously minor ones --- I suppose this is great if you are a Windows user, it should convince you to switch, but for the rest of us it sucks.....
CERT has made what, 1 activity incident report based on actual events or compromises, intrusion patterns, intrusion details, or reports on new types of threats since 2001?
Governments don't know what to do about security, I guess... their efforts at 'reporting' just degenerate into vulnerability listing, and other mundane non-intelligence-requiring activity.
Either that or they think it's too dangerous to tell the public what direction attacks/bad guys seem to be heading.
Um... they actually ever made laptops or desktops with full-sized RCA jacks ?
I've actually never seen one of those on a computer, ever, except possibly on a high-end sound card designed for stereo hookups.
Mini-RCA for audio in and out is almost universal in the computing world
There are some digital and optical audio in/out options, but they never seem to have caught on in PCs, probably because they're too expensive -- and the average PC user is just looking to hook up a pair of $5 speakers, a $0.30 microphone, and maybe an input from another soundcard or juke box.
X Out of stock - This product is not available for purchase at this time.
If the OP is correct about line-in being on the verge of extinction, then I guess they would be out of stock forever... queue up the conspiracy theories now :-)
Unfortunately it may be in part an explanation for the downfall of Unix on the desktop (and for the success of Unix in the datacenter). Nothing too weird or fancy means you can't impress people much either, since, well, fancy things are usually what commercial OSes provide :)
One of the major ways consumers are convinced to install a piece of software, or buy something is because it does something fancy, looks cool, or has these sophisticated features, in a way that shows it has this advantage over the competition. As long as Unix has none of that to offer by default readily accessible out of the box, it will be at a disadvantage.
But it does mean the result is probably more stable (nothing fancy = reduced complexity = fewer bugs)
Which is great for server farms.
Why not just make it close,minimize,maximize:minimize,maximize,close Then everyone can be happy?
That's not democratic... that's either plutocracy or capitalist.
Anyways, Open Source projects are not a form of government, they don't make rules or laws -- they write code.
I'm not sure it makes sense to use descriptions of government to describe the process of writing code and deciding what goes in and what goes out.
The US District court of Eastern Texas isn't a democracy either.
That fact doesn't mean the US government is not democratic.
3. Convince the maintainer to fix it the way you like it.
Which is exactly what they are trying to do, by using very strong words, demands, and trying to get a 'vote' to convince the maintainer that their position is popular and the maintainer should fix it.
Even if Open source isn't a democracy, the results of a vote/study should be persuasive, provided the study was conducted in a fair unbiased way that didn't allow supporters to self-select (since apathetic users who liked the change would be less likely to show up at a 'vote' about undoing the change -- in fact, the vocal minority opposing a certain design change might get more votes their way, due only to the fact that more of the opponents are concerned about the matter, and supporters barely notice a vote is going on).
You have the option to keep using XP and blow off Windows 7 entirely.