"In most cases you can see that the hard maths (the physical and geometry) is either done by a computer or has been done by someone else." (Since the author of TFA was too lazy to [sic], I too should follow her example)
What happens when this become a recursive problem where all programmers rely on the "someone else" programmer who doesn't exist based on this definition?
Now who said governmental analysts were boring? Perhaps this explains why nothing ever gets done? Personally, I prefer mouth to ear communications and will even settle for word-of-mouth, but whatever floats your boat...
Florida: All projects are required to be profitable within four years, which rarely happens for any broadband network—even in the private sector. A special ad valorem tax, unique among infrastructure projects, is imposed on pubic broadband efforts.
I swear there are other things on the internet besides porn. Aren't there?
So many errors in this story, and I know Florida has been referred to as "America's wang", but, come on, don't call their broadband efforts pubic! That was enough for me.
One could argue that the "damage to the brand, costly remediation, and potential liability" that google details specifically just falls under Microsoft's competition, legal action and (possibly) product flops. "We're Microsoft. Only the little people deal with details!"
On the other hand, Google spells out a lot of things they are doing or are going to do to us.. and yet we click and use the products anyway..
If Microsoft can't educate their employees on how to avoid phishing / social engineering attacks what does this say for the rest of the world? Considering the fact that they have already had a number of other widely publicized incidents in the media recently, shouldn't they be on high alert?
I really hope at some point they decide to release actual details on what really occured, because love or hate them, Microsoft could be the company that actually does something that might actually get through to end users.
8. A few minutes later your phone buzzes and a message shows, "Your cab has arrived".
It doesn't get any simpler than that. The taxi drivers love it (for the reasons you stated). The riders love it because it's faster and easier than the old phone system. The dispatchers hate it because they can no longer skim the drivers' fares. In NYC, I'm sure the cab companies skim from the dispatchers. The thing is, the cab companies probably see increased profits, except it will all be "on the books".
Yes, but "on the books" works both ways. I would think that having the fares of your drivers logged on a server would probably stop some skimming that goes on at the driver level. Besides, from what I understand many drivers these days pay a base 'rental' rate for taking out a car (they rent the car from the company that owns the medallions), plus they pay for their own fuel any other incidentals. At the end of the day, driver brings the car back to company, and most don't make a whole lot after the costs of car rent and gas.
So, I don't know that the drivers would "love it", and I'm not sure the concept of dispatcher taking calls and sending drivers to locations like you'd see in smaller towns applies at all, atleast not as far as the medallion cars go. Overall, most of the resistance is about the extra logging of data across the board, as well as general reluctance to change
The cab companies in NYC have hired lobbyists to get Washington, DC to implement a NYC medallion system.
Hmmm.. the thing is, the New York system WORKED REALLY WELL for the consumer. New York cabs were metered, clearly displayed the fare information, and were pretty easily acquired just about anywhere at any hour you needed one. The laws were extremely pro-consumer, and the majority of the drivers new they were in a service industry where good service with a smile would usually net them a good tip. As a native New Yorker, I was in for a surprise when I moved to Washington, DC some 10 years ago.
If you were ever unfortunate enough to deal with the DC taxi system the way it USED to be until just a couple of years ago, now THAT was a complete cluster frak. Fares were based on convoluted zones drawn specifically in such a way that the lowest fares just so happened to coincide with travel between certain government building areas and the capitol hill area neighborhoods where the politicians lived. (..fancy that..) Then, add to that the absolutely insane allowance for drivers to pick up additional fares along the way, so you'd end up crammed in with other passengers half in your lap and snaking your way on detours to drop off these complete strangers before eventually getting to where YOU should have been 20 minutes ago. Then after all that having the driver try to swindle you because the zone system meant NO METERS.
Those drivers fought pretty hard and managed to keep meters out of the taxis for quite a long time. They were quite vigilante. At the same time, the addition of meters also came with elimination of picking up additional fares during someone elses trip. Naturally, the ones loudest in opposition were usually the most corrupt drivers on the take that equated the changes with financial loss and harder work. In the end, the drivers I've spoken to have all said how much they came to love the changes because people who would simply NOT deal with the previous taxi situation (including myself.. ) now started taking taxis because they knew they would be charged fairly, and wouldn't have to squeeze in so 6 more people going to three different locations could fit in the car. So there were MORE customers, who were getting better service and thus TIPPING for a change
HMMM... I read TFA, but having just gone back to it and then followed the linkage along to the ACTUAL story, I really want to kick myself now for having anything to do with discussion of something that originated in the NEW YORK F*CKING POST! UGH! I need a shower now... might as well have TMZ tag in for sloppy seconds while you're at it Slashdot... thanks!
Having wasted this amount of time already ranting on, guess I'll just click that Submit button and move on with my regularly scheduled life..
What's more, with script blocking enable (via noscript) the site has no content below their header / drop-down menus. So much for graceful degradation...
Glad I checked the comments here before even bothering to temp allow their scripts, as stepping into such a multi-page steaming pile would have surely irritated me greatly.
So far you've mentioned that the person(s) doing the actual install are either (1) a consultant, or (2) the IT person for the company. I wonder, where is this installing person in the support chain? I would be directing those support inquiries to the person that did the installing. You can even explain to the caller that the person who installed the product on the machine should have communicated any agreements they may have encountered during the install to the actual end user.
So much for graceful degradation. At first I hit the site and thought "OK, where's the story?". Right-click, noscript, allow v3.co.uk, "THERE it is.". Funny how most if not all of the ads appear just FINE without javascript. So not cool.
The article doesn't have much detail about this "auction-style" marketplace, but I have to wonder, how are people transferring $50,000 between two parties in exchange for such goods? "Underground" would really have to be quite underground for this to be going on without much notice, no?
I also wonder if Trend Micro felt obligated to report this "discovery" to any authorities before they contacted eWeek about it...
Re:Ehh - Not entirely different from magazines
on
Why Do You Block Ads?
·
· Score: 1
Um.. yeah.. because you read it for the articles.
Re:Ehh - Not entirely different from magazines
on
Why Do You Block Ads?
·
· Score: 1
> Exactly. I can change the channel on TV when ads come on. > I can flip the page in a magazine. But with many websites, they wrap the > fucking text around an ad that will give you epilepsy if you look at it.
To be fair, I just flipped through current issues of several IT, business and finance magazines that I have on hand. Most magazine articles that are > a few parapraphs will force atleast one page flip somewhere, with the space of that page you flipped containing two full-page or several smaller ads that are either going to catch your eye (be effective) or not. And then you have those articles that have you traversing the entire issue to read two paragraphs here, three paragraphs continued ten pages further in, +10 pages forward for one paragraph plus illustration, etc.. And then I just love the final inner page articles that get continued on an EARLIER page in the magazine, so much for reading a magazine from the front to the back.
This is pretty much why I don't read magazines that I actually have to PAY for. Heck, I can't get some of them to STOP sending me the darn things.
However, there is still no excuse for ads that make any sort of sound or get in the way of normal reading of content and related navigational functions.
In December/January the local Target here (VA) carries a "Candy Cane" Icee that I highly recommend! What better than to add an additional cooling sensation to an already frozen beverage during winter.
Ok.. this bugged me the first time I read it in the parent post, but now that we have this statement "proving" the correctness of the parent, I must interject... The parent was INCORRECT.
10W * 10W * 2 = 200
is NOT the same as
2 x 62 W , 2 x 62 , 69 W = 317, because this statement means:
(2 x 62W) PLUS (2 x 62W) PLUS (69W) = 317
(note the locations where addition is done where the parent multiplies all factors.. )
thus, USING THE GIVEN LOGITECH EXAMPLE, the correct calculation in the parent post would be:
10W * 2 = 20W (assuming 2 speakers)
OR, if logitech used the method of calculation used in the parent post, they would have:
2 * 62 * 2 * 62 * 69 = 1060944W
I know many manufactures do (incorrectly) pull all sorts of calculations out of their nether regions, but I just wanted to clarify that what is being stated in the example product, and the original post, are NOT the same, and thus correctness has not been proven.
Not sure if they still do this, but their mail catalogs used to do something similar based on either geographical location or some other determinant. I noticed this back around '98 or '99. I lived in Manhattan at the time, and was on the phone with a friend in NJ who was asking for purchasing advice. We had the exact same catalog in front of us, but the prices in his catalog were almost all a few percentage points lower.
The only difference between the catalogs was a "promotional code" that they made you enter at the website. A check with other in-town friends & neighbors showed pricing consistent with my catalog. Perhaps it was just New York City residents they were charging more, who knows.
Now when they say "cross-boarder", are they referring to the people I rent rooms out to or the snow/skate kind? Is good proofing too much to ask for these days?
I don't think the RIAA or the labels for that matter, necessarily get anything from the performance of a song. The composer(s)/lyricist(s) usually are associated with a publishing company (though it's also possible to self-publish), and they would be the ones receiving moneys for a performance of their 'works'. You'll see the publishing companies listed in the song credits, and you'll see the publishing companies belong to a larger association that manages the collection of such performance fees, there are mainly two -- ASCAP and BMI -- but others exist. Artists looking for material for record go to the publishing companies who basically act as brokers and have the connections to get your compositions heard by the A&R people at the labels.. in exchange for this service, they keep an percentage, usually half.
The only way the record companies or RIAA would get a piece is if the rights holders sold those rights away... usually, though, the writers hang onto their rights, as this usually ends up being a very lucrative part of the business.
Slashdot Mirror
"In most cases you can see that the hard maths (the physical and geometry) is either done by a computer or has been done by someone else." (Since the author of TFA was too lazy to [sic], I too should follow her example)
What happens when this become a recursive problem where all programmers rely on the "someone else" programmer who doesn't exist based on this definition?
"Journalism", yay!
Now who said governmental analysts were boring? Perhaps this explains why nothing ever gets done? Personally, I prefer mouth to ear communications and will even settle for word-of-mouth, but whatever floats your boat...
Florida: All projects are required to be profitable within four years, which rarely happens for any broadband network—even in the private sector. A special ad valorem tax, unique among infrastructure projects, is imposed on pubic broadband efforts.
I swear there are other things on the internet besides porn. Aren't there?
So many errors in this story, and I know Florida has been referred to as "America's wang", but, come on, don't call their broadband efforts pubic! That was enough for me.
It does a really fantastic job for me. It even filters out these annoying emails I get from Google's Play Store. :D
One would think gmail's spam filter would whitelist *.google.com, but they apparently don't trust themselves.
One could argue that the "damage to the brand, costly remediation, and potential liability" that google details specifically just falls under Microsoft's competition, legal action and (possibly) product flops. "We're Microsoft. Only the little people deal with details!"
On the other hand, Google spells out a lot of things they are doing or are going to do to us.. and yet we click and use the products anyway..
From TFA: "but there was still a risk that one of Mexico’s powerful criminal organizations would get to the radioactive booty first " (emphasis mine)
Sure, it's a correct sentence, and I admit I have the maturity of a 6-year old at times, but why word it this way? Who wrote this thing? Oh, wait... "Copyright © 2014 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists".. nevermind. It's obvious what they have on their minds. <homer>mmmmmm, radioactive boooty (slobber)</homer>
If Microsoft can't educate their employees on how to avoid phishing / social engineering attacks what does this say for the rest of the world? Considering the fact that they have already had a number of other widely publicized incidents in the media recently, shouldn't they be on high alert?
I really hope at some point they decide to release actual details on what really occured, because love or hate them, Microsoft could be the company that actually does something that might actually get through to end users.
Same video, much better quality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJDv-zdhzMY
8. A few minutes later your phone buzzes and a message shows, "Your cab has arrived".
It doesn't get any simpler than that. The taxi drivers love it (for the reasons you stated). The riders love it because it's faster and easier than the old phone system. The dispatchers hate it because they can no longer skim the drivers' fares. In NYC, I'm sure the cab companies skim from the dispatchers. The thing is, the cab companies probably see increased profits, except it will all be "on the books".
Yes, but "on the books" works both ways. I would think that having the fares of your drivers logged on a server would probably stop some skimming that goes on at the driver level. Besides, from what I understand many drivers these days pay a base 'rental' rate for taking out a car (they rent the car from the company that owns the medallions), plus they pay for their own fuel any other incidentals. At the end of the day, driver brings the car back to company, and most don't make a whole lot after the costs of car rent and gas.
So, I don't know that the drivers would "love it", and I'm not sure the concept of dispatcher taking calls and sending drivers to locations like you'd see in smaller towns applies at all, atleast not as far as the medallion cars go. Overall, most of the resistance is about the extra logging of data across the board, as well as general reluctance to change
The cab companies in NYC have hired lobbyists to get Washington, DC to implement a NYC medallion system.
Hmmm.. the thing is, the New York system WORKED REALLY WELL for the consumer. New York cabs were metered, clearly displayed the fare information, and were pretty easily acquired just about anywhere at any hour you needed one. The laws were extremely pro-consumer, and the majority of the drivers new they were in a service industry where good service with a smile would usually net them a good tip. As a native New Yorker, I was in for a surprise when I moved to Washington, DC some 10 years ago.
If you were ever unfortunate enough to deal with the DC taxi system the way it USED to be until just a couple of years ago, now THAT was a complete cluster frak. Fares were based on convoluted zones drawn specifically in such a way that the lowest fares just so happened to coincide with travel between certain government building areas and the capitol hill area neighborhoods where the politicians lived. (..fancy that..) Then, add to that the absolutely insane allowance for drivers to pick up additional fares along the way, so you'd end up crammed in with other passengers half in your lap and snaking your way on detours to drop off these complete strangers before eventually getting to where YOU should have been 20 minutes ago. Then after all that having the driver try to swindle you because the zone system meant NO METERS.
Those drivers fought pretty hard and managed to keep meters out of the taxis for quite a long time. They were quite vigilante. At the same time, the addition of meters also came with elimination of picking up additional fares during someone elses trip. Naturally, the ones loudest in opposition were usually the most corrupt drivers on the take that equated the changes with financial loss and harder work. In the end, the drivers I've spoken to have all said how much they came to love the changes because people who would simply NOT deal with the previous taxi situation (including myself.. ) now started taking taxis because they knew they would be charged fairly, and wouldn't have to squeeze in so 6 more people going to three different locations could fit in the car. So there were MORE customers, who were getting better service and thus TIPPING for a change
HMMM... I read TFA, but having just gone back to it and then followed the linkage along to the ACTUAL story, I really want to kick myself now for having anything to do with discussion of something that originated in the NEW YORK F*CKING POST! UGH! I need a shower now... might as well have TMZ tag in for sloppy seconds while you're at it Slashdot... thanks!
Having wasted this amount of time already ranting on, guess I'll just click that Submit button and move on with my regularly scheduled life..
What's more, with script blocking enable (via noscript) the site has no content below their header / drop-down menus. So much for graceful degradation...
Glad I checked the comments here before even bothering to temp allow their scripts, as stepping into such a multi-page steaming pile would have surely irritated me greatly.
So far you've mentioned that the person(s) doing the actual install are either (1) a consultant, or (2) the IT person for the company. I wonder, where is this installing person in the support chain? I would be directing those support inquiries to the person that did the installing. You can even explain to the caller that the person who installed the product on the machine should have communicated any agreements they may have encountered during the install to the actual end user.
See what Anandra did? Major WOW factor! Pretty much...
So much for graceful degradation. At first I hit the site and thought "OK, where's the story?". Right-click, noscript, allow v3.co.uk, "THERE it is.". Funny how most if not all of the ads appear just FINE without javascript. So not cool.
FWIW, that should read widely read annual Fortune survey.
The article doesn't have much detail about this "auction-style" marketplace, but I have to wonder, how are people transferring $50,000 between two parties in exchange for such goods? "Underground" would really have to be quite underground for this to be going on without much notice, no?
I also wonder if Trend Micro felt obligated to report this "discovery" to any authorities before they contacted eWeek about it...
Um.. yeah.. because you read it for the articles.
> Exactly. I can change the channel on TV when ads come on.
> I can flip the page in a magazine. But with many websites, they wrap the
> fucking text around an ad that will give you epilepsy if you look at it.
To be fair, I just flipped through current issues of several IT, business and finance magazines that I have on hand. Most magazine articles that are > a few parapraphs will force atleast one page flip somewhere, with the space of that page you flipped containing two full-page or several smaller ads that are either going to catch your eye (be effective) or not. And then you have those articles that have you traversing the entire issue to read two paragraphs here, three paragraphs continued ten pages further in, +10 pages forward for one paragraph plus illustration, etc.. And then I just love the final inner page articles that get continued on an EARLIER page in the magazine, so much for reading a magazine from the front to the back.
This is pretty much why I don't read magazines that I actually have to PAY for. Heck, I can't get some of them to STOP sending me the darn things.
However, there is still no excuse for ads that make any sort of sound or get in the way of normal reading of content and related navigational functions.
>and in a home the parents could keep it.
I thought the goal was to prevent the installation of malware...
I'm pretty sure their cherry hasn't changed..
In December/January the local Target here (VA) carries a "Candy Cane" Icee that I highly recommend! What better than to add an additional cooling sensation to an already frozen beverage during winter.
10W * 10W * 2 = 200
is NOT the same as
2 x 62 W , 2 x 62 , 69 W = 317, because this statement means:
(2 x 62W) PLUS (2 x 62W) PLUS (69W) = 317
(note the locations where addition is done where the parent multiplies all factors.. )
thus, USING THE GIVEN LOGITECH EXAMPLE, the correct calculation in the parent post would be:
10W * 2 = 20W (assuming 2 speakers)
OR, if logitech used the method of calculation used in the parent post, they would have:
2 * 62 * 2 * 62 * 69 = 1060944W
I know many manufactures do (incorrectly) pull all sorts of calculations out of their nether regions, but I just wanted to clarify that what is being stated in the example product, and the original post, are NOT the same, and thus correctness has not been proven.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Then I saw this post and thought it was related but bizarre to refer to them as Last Year's Gadgets. Frightening.
But, seriously, old cables/components.. hasn't this been done to death already? :)
How very yesterday.
Not sure if they still do this, but their mail catalogs used to do something similar based on either geographical location or some other determinant. I noticed this back around '98 or '99. I lived in Manhattan at the time, and was on the phone with a friend in NJ who was asking for purchasing advice. We had the exact same catalog in front of us, but the prices in his catalog were almost all a few percentage points lower.
The only difference between the catalogs was a "promotional code" that they made you enter at the website. A check with other in-town friends & neighbors showed pricing consistent with my catalog. Perhaps it was just New York City residents they were charging more, who knows.
> It has nothing to do with the fact that I'm a shiftless slacker
If that were true, wouldn't you have said " i t has nothing to do with the fact that i 'm a shiftless slacker"?
Now when they say "cross-boarder", are they referring to the people I rent rooms out to or the snow/skate kind? Is good proofing too much to ask for these days?
I don't think the RIAA or the labels for that matter, necessarily get anything from the performance of a song. The composer(s)/lyricist(s) usually are associated with a publishing company (though it's also possible to self-publish), and they would be the ones receiving moneys for a performance of their 'works'. You'll see the publishing companies listed in the song credits, and you'll see the publishing companies belong to a larger association that manages the collection of such performance fees, there are mainly two -- ASCAP and BMI -- but others exist. Artists looking for material for record go to the publishing companies who basically act as brokers and have the connections to get your compositions heard by the A&R people at the labels.. in exchange for this service, they keep an percentage, usually half.
The only way the record companies or RIAA would get a piece is if the rights holders sold those rights away... usually, though, the writers hang onto their rights, as this usually ends up being a very lucrative part of the business.