So just to ask, when was Google the first into a market?
I am having a hard time coming up with many companies since the invention of the computer that were truly first to market, and successful for the long term. Xerox is the only one I am sure of, and that was due to patent protection (this is not a criticism, this is what patents were meant for). It is quite rare for a first to market company to actually prosper on it own, as far as I can see. In every space, later competitors seem to beat them out.
If facts and evidence mean anything to you (do they?) then an excellent case can be made for Steven Jobs being one of the greatest CEOs of the modern era.
The turn around of Apple after he returned is commonly cited as the greatest turnaround in history. Jobs left profound imprints on at least four different industries (computers, cinema, music, telephones) a list that perhaps could be extended even further.
Who would you nominate as being greater?
And I speak as someone who finds Jobs' behavior to have been often be repellent and inexcusable.
When my then employer (Overture) was acquired by Yahoo they took the resume of every employee on file and submitted it to a research firm that checked the accuracy of every checkable fact, and a flag report was issued for everyone. The only anomaly on mine was that the award date of my Masters was a different month than what I stated - I used the month they handed me the diploma, it was recorded the next month (I have never felt a need to embellish my resume). A number of people were severed at that time for resume inconsistencies.
Are you telling me that Yahoo did not do this for its most important (and expensive) employee. The one employee whose qualifications are a maater of public record, and material facts for SEC filings?
... If this encryption is used well and the keys safeguarded effectively, it is unbreakable until a breakthrough in methods or technology comes about - quantum computing holds the promise to break some forms of strong encryption, if it ever matures.
If you capture the computer on which the files are composed (using commercial software), and the encryption is performed, and it is running a regular consumer OS, are the keys/pass phrases really secure against an opponent with unlimited resources?
An excellent architect still codes, and is well acquainted with the code base he/she is responsible for, and furthermore has a solid grasp if computational complexity and can identify efficient and inefficient coding choices. If the code performs poorly the architect is at fault.
I know many are desperate for uniformity, but it's really OK if not every single institution offers exactly the same programs of study.
But if one university in the Florida system has a Computer Science Department, it should be U of F. Its role has historically been as the flagship science and engineering university in Florida. When the flagship loses this key field, it is cause for alarm.
Additional tax on "the 1%" would yield about $5bn/year....
Only if you agree that the Bush tax cuts should expire this year - the baseline against which this claim is made (i.e. the expiration of the cuts erases much of this tax inequality). But the people making this claim - Republicans - are insisting that those cuts must not expire for the rich.
4) Basically dictated to banks they WERE going to take a huge sum of bail-out money, like it or not.
Never before have LARGE business and government been so twisted together, and that happened on the Democrats watch, mostly while it had total control.
4) would be TARP, proposed by Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson during the global financial crisis in September 2008, and signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008.
But, hey when was the last time a right-winger let facts get in the way of a rant?
Adding up every contribution to science, medicine (not all of it research), and scientific education over the years mentioned I get $655 million, about 15% of the cost of the LHC, and less than the annual budget of CERN. This is 11% of Broad's wealth.
Rather than showing how private wealth can replace public science, it would appear to show the rank inadequacy of this resource for that purpose.
Fuck you statist. You want to believe in the "value of science" then DO IT WITH YOUR MONEY. Stop stealing money from the rest of us who are happy with the depth of knowledge we have now just to fund your pet elitist academic excercises...
Care to show the courage of your obscene convictions and post under your screen name Coward?
I think the counter argument to your idea of 'pooling' resources is that this isn't really necessary. We have the resources to do this as the United States or as the EU or probably even as China itself. I don't care what country/countries/bordered region does it, I just care that it gets done.
And the counter to that is that there is a limit on how large share of its resources that any nation is willing to devote to a given class of science projects. The combined subjective limits of multiple nations will always be larger than the limits of any of the individual ones.
Exploring new regions of science (in physics and astronomy/space exploration at least) inevitably drives up costs with time, and it is inevitable that it will hit a point that only the combined science budgets of all major nations will be sufficient to fund that next (and perhaps last) Big Project.
After that last Big Project, only long-term world economic growth, and ever longer project schedules, will allow follow-ons. (Or else we get smarter and figure a way to do it cheaper.)
... can identify the patterns in a volunteer's thinking that are likely to result in an error 20 seconds
I am familiar with this pattern of thinking - it is called "guessing". Guessing in math will usually fail to provide the correct answer. I am skeptical that detecting this and telling the student that they are going to make an error will actually be very helpful; people are usually aware that they are guessing.
I have had good experience with the Thermaltake BlacX USB HD dock. Just plug an HD into it, and it mounts. This way you rotate through more than one backup drive. I run rsync commands to copy (and them incrementally update) the HD swap drives.
There's a down side though if you can store large amounts of power. If you break the circuit the power will need to go somewhere and you get a large explosion....
Unless of course you do something reasonable like providing a quench protection/management system, like just about every high power superconductor magnet in the world already does.
There are a number of ways for dealing with this - segmenting the magnet into sections so that the entire system is not at risk, having energy dump resistors that absorb the energy, having a coolant that boils off through a relief valve system to remove the heat in a managed way, etc.
...Ultimately, the average ~75kg human would probably take around 2 barrels (~280kg) of crude oil to lift to geosynchronous orbit, or 1.5 barrels to put in LEO. (side note: a long flight in a 747 burns nearly 3 barrels of oil per passenger.)
7 billion people x 2 barrels = 14 billion barrels. That's less than 1% of the current proven oil reserves.
Of course, we'd probably want to give people a place to live once they reach orbit, but I can't really estimate the total mass of all the equipment needed to sustain the world's population. It seems feasible that between our proven oil reserves, whatever unproven reserves may exist, and the trillions of barrels tied up in shale, there's actually enough oil on the planet to see everyone off to their new life in space [emphasis added].
Since a system of perfect efficiency is assumed for transporting human body mass up to orbit, we can treat this is only a lower bound (very low, the fact that it assumes the fuel cost is half of a typical long 747 flight is a nice tip off that this is the case). But lets stay with this perfect lift to orbit efficiency thing.
We can easily make some lower bound estimates of the orbital domicile masses (since it is stipulated that we aren't just launching them into orbit to suck vacuum). We have one in orbit right now, the ISS, which has a crew capacity of 6 and a mass of 450,000 kg, or 75,000 kg per person. This immediately increases the orbital energy cost per person by a factor of 1000, so it becomes on the order of 100 times the current proven oil reserves. Clearly fossil fuels aren't going to do it. To really relocate Earth civilization into orbit of course would require placing all of the Earth's economy in orbit also -- producing food, manufacturing, etc. so the mass and energy budget will be much higher than the ISS calculation.
Besides it's not like these companies have all of the staff and resources necessary to watch and monitor the thousands to millions of TV users all at once.
Not all at once? This is why it is no big deal?
I would think being able to monitor any of millions of people any time they liked, to whatever degree they felt the interest for, without restriction, would be sufficient to make it a big deal.
This is mostly meant for facial recognition technology, Skype, and the like.
Facial recognition = the ability of software to recognize who is in a room, and continuously report the occupants to a third party data marketer. Think all of the TVs of a major vendor doing this, everywhere.
MuMetal is quite fragile -- it loses its magnetic shielding properties if you as much as bend it. It might be somewhat impractical to wear it -- it'd need to be bonded to a stiff substrate to protect it from being deformed too much.
Well, duh! If it is to protect you from mind control AND meteorites of course it will be bonded to a nice sturdy Kevlar helmet!
How would you be able to tell the meteorite from other rocks? Assuming they didnt leave an impact crater.
...
If you see a rock on your lawn or in your flower bed, hopefully you would know if it was there last week, or not. Likewise, rocks don't tend to get on roofs by other means.
...
Your neighborhood must have much better behaved kids than mine.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps so, but the others are all dead-on.
So just to ask, when was Google the first into a market?
I am having a hard time coming up with many companies since the invention of the computer that were truly first to market, and successful for the long term. Xerox is the only one I am sure of, and that was due to patent protection (this is not a criticism, this is what patents were meant for). It is quite rare for a first to market company to actually prosper on it own, as far as I can see. In every space, later competitors seem to beat them out.
And Steve Jobs is not the greatest CEO ever.
If facts and evidence mean anything to you (do they?) then an excellent case can be made for Steven Jobs being one of the greatest CEOs of the modern era.
The turn around of Apple after he returned is commonly cited as the greatest turnaround in history. Jobs left profound imprints on at least four different industries (computers, cinema, music, telephones) a list that perhaps could be extended even further.
Who would you nominate as being greater?
And I speak as someone who finds Jobs' behavior to have been often be repellent and inexcusable.
When my then employer (Overture) was acquired by Yahoo they took the resume of every employee on file and submitted it to a research firm that checked the accuracy of every checkable fact, and a flag report was issued for everyone. The only anomaly on mine was that the award date of my Masters was a different month than what I stated - I used the month they handed me the diploma, it was recorded the next month (I have never felt a need to embellish my resume). A number of people were severed at that time for resume inconsistencies.
Are you telling me that Yahoo did not do this for its most important (and expensive) employee. The one employee whose qualifications are a maater of public record, and material facts for SEC filings?
... If this encryption is used well and the keys safeguarded effectively, it is unbreakable until a breakthrough in methods or technology comes about - quantum computing holds the promise to break some forms of strong encryption, if it ever matures.
If you capture the computer on which the files are composed (using commercial software), and the encryption is performed, and it is running a regular consumer OS, are the keys/pass phrases really secure against an opponent with unlimited resources?
Where does he keep these huge keys? Does he memorize them?
...
I'm sure there may well be other documents that are not yet released.
Indeed. They released 17 documents, and state that they capture thousands.
Mod up! My experience to - never been out of work in Southern California. Also in my 50s.
Spot on! Mod Up!
An excellent architect still codes, and is well acquainted with the code base he/she is responsible for, and furthermore has a solid grasp if computational complexity and can identify efficient and inefficient coding choices. If the code performs poorly the architect is at fault.
I know many are desperate for uniformity, but it's really OK if not every single institution offers exactly the same programs of study.
But if one university in the Florida system has a Computer Science Department, it should be U of F. Its role has historically been as the flagship science and engineering university in Florida. When the flagship loses this key field, it is cause for alarm.
I'm interested in hearing your proposal for this.
Additional tax on "the 1%" would yield about $5bn/year....
Only if you agree that the Bush tax cuts should expire this year - the baseline against which this claim is made (i.e. the expiration of the cuts erases much of this tax inequality). But the people making this claim - Republicans - are insisting that those cuts must not expire for the rich.
This is intellectual dishonesty.
I don't buy the line that "government" must fund everything..
Therefore it shouldn't fund anything? Shall we have a straw-man dance battle?
4) Basically dictated to banks they WERE going to take a huge sum of bail-out money, like it or not.
Never before have LARGE business and government been so twisted together, and that happened on the Democrats watch, mostly while it had total control.
4) would be TARP, proposed by Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson during the global financial crisis in September 2008, and signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008.
But, hey when was the last time a right-winger let facts get in the way of a rant?
derr...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Broad
Adding up every contribution to science, medicine (not all of it research), and scientific education over the years mentioned I get $655 million, about 15% of the cost of the LHC, and less than the annual budget of CERN. This is 11% of Broad's wealth.
Rather than showing how private wealth can replace public science, it would appear to show the rank inadequacy of this resource for that purpose.
Fuck you statist. You want to believe in the "value of science" then DO IT WITH YOUR MONEY. Stop stealing money from the rest of us who are happy with the depth of knowledge we have now just to fund your pet elitist academic excercises...
Care to show the courage of your obscene convictions and post under your screen name Coward?
...
I think the counter argument to your idea of 'pooling' resources is that this isn't really necessary. We have the resources to do this as the United States or as the EU or probably even as China itself. I don't care what country/countries/bordered region does it, I just care that it gets done.
And the counter to that is that there is a limit on how large share of its resources that any nation is willing to devote to a given class of science projects. The combined subjective limits of multiple nations will always be larger than the limits of any of the individual ones.
Exploring new regions of science (in physics and astronomy/space exploration at least) inevitably drives up costs with time, and it is inevitable that it will hit a point that only the combined science budgets of all major nations will be sufficient to fund that next (and perhaps last) Big Project.
After that last Big Project, only long-term world economic growth, and ever longer project schedules, will allow follow-ons. (Or else we get smarter and figure a way to do it cheaper.)
I am familiar with this pattern of thinking - it is called "guessing". Guessing in math will usually fail to provide the correct answer. I am skeptical that detecting this and telling the student that they are going to make an error will actually be very helpful; people are usually aware that they are guessing.
I have had good experience with the Thermaltake BlacX USB HD dock. Just plug an HD into it, and it mounts. This way you rotate through more than one backup drive. I run rsync commands to copy (and them incrementally update) the HD swap drives.
...
There's a down side though if you can store large amounts of power. If you break the circuit the power will need to go somewhere and you get a large explosion....
Unless of course you do something reasonable like providing a quench protection/management system, like just about every high power superconductor magnet in the world already does.
There are a number of ways for dealing with this - segmenting the magnet into sections so that the entire system is not at risk, having energy dump resistors that absorb the energy, having a coolant that boils off through a relief valve system to remove the heat in a managed way, etc.
...Ultimately, the average ~75kg human would probably take around 2 barrels (~280kg) of crude oil to lift to geosynchronous orbit, or 1.5 barrels to put in LEO. (side note: a long flight in a 747 burns nearly 3 barrels of oil per passenger.)
7 billion people x 2 barrels = 14 billion barrels. That's less than 1% of the current proven oil reserves.
Of course, we'd probably want to give people a place to live once they reach orbit, but I can't really estimate the total mass of all the equipment needed to sustain the world's population. It seems feasible that between our proven oil reserves, whatever unproven reserves may exist, and the trillions of barrels tied up in shale, there's actually enough oil on the planet to see everyone off to their new life in space [emphasis added].
Since a system of perfect efficiency is assumed for transporting human body mass up to orbit, we can treat this is only a lower bound (very low, the fact that it assumes the fuel cost is half of a typical long 747 flight is a nice tip off that this is the case). But lets stay with this perfect lift to orbit efficiency thing.
We can easily make some lower bound estimates of the orbital domicile masses (since it is stipulated that we aren't just launching them into orbit to suck vacuum). We have one in orbit right now, the ISS, which has a crew capacity of 6 and a mass of 450,000 kg, or 75,000 kg per person. This immediately increases the orbital energy cost per person by a factor of 1000, so it becomes on the order of 100 times the current proven oil reserves. Clearly fossil fuels aren't going to do it. To really relocate Earth civilization into orbit of course would require placing all of the Earth's economy in orbit also -- producing food, manufacturing, etc. so the mass and energy budget will be much higher than the ISS calculation.
...
Besides it's not like these companies have all of the staff and resources necessary to watch and monitor the thousands to millions of TV users all at once.
Not all at once? This is why it is no big deal?
I would think being able to monitor any of millions of people any time they liked, to whatever degree they felt the interest for, without restriction, would be sufficient to make it a big deal.
This is mostly meant for facial recognition technology, Skype, and the like.
Facial recognition = the ability of software to recognize who is in a room, and continuously report the occupants to a third party data marketer. Think all of the TVs of a major vendor doing this, everywhere.
Chill, people.
Right. Move along folks, there's nothing to see.
MuMetal is quite fragile -- it loses its magnetic shielding properties if you as much as bend it. It might be somewhat impractical to wear it -- it'd need to be bonded to a stiff substrate to protect it from being deformed too much.
Well, duh! If it is to protect you from mind control AND meteorites of course it will be bonded to a nice sturdy Kevlar helmet!
How would you be able to tell the meteorite from other rocks? Assuming they didnt leave an impact crater.
...
If you see a rock on your lawn or in your flower bed, hopefully you would know if it was there last week, or not. Likewise, rocks don't tend to get on roofs by other means.
...
Your neighborhood must have much better behaved kids than mine.
Conversely anything that appears in a picture is real?
I've got some amazing things to show you! (Any photoshopping done was just to enhance clarity, honest.)
Curiously the comment I responded to has disappeared. What can cause a post deletion?