Maybe the author of the blog should have considered asking RIM what the problem is?
Why? So they can get a form response telling them to reinstall their drivers and upgrade to the latest firmware (even though that caused the problem).
Have you ever tried to get through a support channel to tell a vendor about an actual flaw in their product? Most of the time, the first tier support guys don't listen to you at all and try to get rid of you as quickly as possible. If you do get someone who has any skill or knowledge they will give you a good suggestion, then you hang up, try it, it doesn't work, and you are back to square one. It's maddening.
He is now creating a supercomputer grid across China and he is working on a bio-supercomputer extension to human brains called THIRD-BRAIN.
But when queried about the AI aspect, he says that they will just have to research it, even after the interviewer points out many other people have been working on this. I think he greatly underestimates the problem! Saying that all other AI researchers have not had an integral approach is a bit lacking as an answer to me.
It's pure hubris. Even if he does make some AI breakthrough (unlikely), he may find that his shiny new grid is not suited to its implementation. It may not clique well. He has a system (a grid) and is trying to apply it to a known problem (AI). It's a lofty and noble goal, but it isn't the best way to solve a problem. Usually, it's a good idea to have your algorithms and systems though out (or at least an idea of what they are) before starting implementation.
Fortunately for him though, he has a nice preexisting model that he can copy the structure of. Our brains are distributed, and are cliqued (from my understanding). So building a grid and trying to apply it to AI is not a terrible idea.
At least the Chinese will have a nice super-grid to do weapons research on in the mean time.
If we ever want a good web, the current mentality must be disposed of..
The web today is built on transferring documents and everything else is a hack on that...we need something more unified, easier to code...something that will put the client and server side together in an intuitive way, not the AJAX crap flying around ATM...
The combination of technology and private property looks like the best way to ensure conservation. Make sure the land in question belongs to somebody, so they have an incentive to take care of it
The Tragedy of the Commons defeats this argument. If I'm the private owner, why should I spend my money to preserve it when I could make money be selling the land to a clear-cutter? Yes, there's less rain-forest now, but that cost is paid by society, not by me. I personally get net ahead by abusing my piece of the commons.
Individuals do what is best for themselves individually. Collectives can do what is best for the collective. The only way to protect a commons is through government, because it represents the collective of the people.
That's a strange number to order. Is that for a full year? If so, why order them all at once?
Just for a reference, Motorola sells around 10 million RAZRs a quarter. I don't think Apple is crazy enough to believe the iPhone is going to be that popular.
Are you kidding? With the i**** brand on it? RAZRs were trendy because they were thin. B.F.D. Being thin doesn't measure up to being an i-something from Apple.
I would be absolutely shocked if it didn't instantly become more trendy and more popular than the RAZR.
How can you do group development without source control? Do you have bug tracking? Automated builds? A deployment policy / methodology / sign-off (or just someone who is responsible for it)?
It sounds like you've got a group of undisciplined cowboys. Good like imposing structure on them.
Source control, and comments are absolutely required. The only reason not to do them is due to personalities, and if you have that problem, you don't have good devs.
Where is the team lead / project manager in all this? Start there. This is a leadership problem that is causing business problems (bad releases, poor quality control, poor communication, no reuse, no reproducibility, no records).
Look into sucking down some things from XP. Daily stand-up meetings, unit testing, and continuous integration would be a good start. They sound bad to cowboys, but they solve these exact problems.
Voter-verifiable voting is not the issue. Ideally, you want to be able to verify your vote but not prove your verified result to a third party. This is a very difficult problem, and I don't know of any solutions.
The solution is to physically see your physical vote dropping into a one-way tamper-proof container.
This has been the PHBs wet-dream since programming began. They see writing programs as assembly. It isn't assembly. It's design. You can't automate design.
They always talk about making generic components that can just be "glued" together to create a functioning application. You can't. That "glue" is the business logic, and it's what your program does. It's what you are paying the developers to do.
If you have good developers (skilled, not monkeys) they will create (or use) libraries to do most of the heavy lifting, but they still need to put those libraries together in a way that solves a business problem. If you could just automatically glue pieces together, how can you provide a useful product for your customers? Sure, you can take an "email system" and a "social networking" system and "glue" them together, but to do what exactly? Solve some business problem perhaps? How will you "glue" them? By developing business logic.
It's like taking two different ideas / products, placing them in a room together, and expecting "synergy" to create something new and great. Even if you have some great idea about how those two things can be combined to create something, you still need someone to do the design work of actually combining them.
You wouldn't expect an air conditioner and a storage locker to just magically combine together to create a modern refrigerator, would you? You need someone smart to integrate them. That is what a developer does.
By your own admission, you are stretched thin and can't handle your current load. Now you want to take on new clients, but not just any new clients, new clients with large needs that you don't know how to address.
Do you really think that you are going to be able handle your current load (which you say that you can't already), the load from these 2 new big clients (whom are each about 7 times bigger than your current largest client), and be able to figure out how to change the way that you do things to meet the demands of these new clients (when do you plan to have time for this)? No, no, and no, on all counts.
Fix your staffing problems.
Serve your existing clients without killing yourself, then expand.
You are risking your current client base in order to add more business that you admittedly can't handle. You will likely ruin your existing reputation and relationships, just to pick up some clients that you can't serve. It's hard to say "no" to new business, but sometimes you have to. If you grow to fast, it will get out of control.
"Because computer source code is an expressive means for the exchange of information and ideas about computer programming, we hold that it is protected by the First Amendment."
By that logic, you can't patent blue-prints, schematics, technical drawings, or descriptions of a process, a method or a model. In fact, the patent application itself is "an expressive means for the exchange of information," therefore, anything that has a patent application cannot be patented.
I don't know what started companies down this path, but the ones who follow it should be shot. I've gotten calls from HR people who see my resume online, contact me, and then decide I'm not a match because I haven't made a program that interfaces with a particular database or because I don't use the same IDE that they do at the company. Come on, people, an IDE is not something that's really that difficult to get the hang of.
The problem is that no-one is willing to train anymore. Even things that aren't really training, or training that will take all of 2 hours for a good candidate are discounted. I think that it's they make a skill list for "the perfect candidate" and aren't willing to take anyone who is missing a single one of those check-boxes, even when that check-box can be filled in after a couple of hours of training, or even a day of two of playing with the product and conducting research.
Companies say that they want bold, creative, passionate, smart, and independent people, but they only hire robots. See Knocking the exuberance out of employees.
I am sure there are IT guys who know how to do this. If not, then there should be. Each and every school should not be re-inventing the wheel. There should be a board-wide policy document or guide on the preferred (or recommended) way to secure a lab. It's likely that the predecessor was just too incompetent to follow the procedure.
Slashdot Mirror
Flying cars
Image of the referenced tsunami
Why? So they can get a form response telling them to reinstall their drivers and upgrade to the latest firmware (even though that caused the problem).
Have you ever tried to get through a support channel to tell a vendor about an actual flaw in their product? Most of the time, the first tier support guys don't listen to you at all and try to get rid of you as quickly as possible. If you do get someone who has any skill or knowledge they will give you a good suggestion, then you hang up, try it, it doesn't work, and you are back to square one. It's maddening.
Read this: The Submarine, and try to keep your head from exploding.
This might make it a little more clear on what he was saying:
"Hello, kettle? This is pot. You are black."
Larry Flynt and Marvin Miller may have some interesting tales to tell you about prosecution of pornography in the U.S.
Perhaps China is just "applying contemporary community standards" in determining if this man should have been punished.
See also: moral relativism.
It's pure hubris. Even if he does make some AI breakthrough (unlikely), he may find that his shiny new grid is not suited to its implementation. It may not clique well. He has a system (a grid) and is trying to apply it to a known problem (AI). It's a lofty and noble goal, but it isn't the best way to solve a problem. Usually, it's a good idea to have your algorithms and systems though out (or at least an idea of what they are) before starting implementation.
Fortunately for him though, he has a nice preexisting model that he can copy the structure of. Our brains are distributed, and are cliqued (from my understanding). So building a grid and trying to apply it to AI is not a terrible idea.
At least the Chinese will have a nice super-grid to do weapons research on in the mean time.
Innocent Girl Held A Week In North Platte Jail
Web-Services... WSDL and SOAP
The Tragedy of the Commons defeats this argument. If I'm the private owner, why should I spend my money to preserve it when I could make money be selling the land to a clear-cutter? Yes, there's less rain-forest now, but that cost is paid by society, not by me. I personally get net ahead by abusing my piece of the commons.
Individuals do what is best for themselves individually. Collectives can do what is best for the collective. The only way to protect a commons is through government, because it represents the collective of the people.
Citations and references please. We can't really comment on it if we don't know what they are saying.
Are you kidding? With the i**** brand on it? RAZRs were trendy because they were thin. B.F.D. Being thin doesn't measure up to being an i-something from Apple.
I would be absolutely shocked if it didn't instantly become more trendy and more popular than the RAZR.
Unix in a Nutshell
That's it. Everything else I can look up online, or check out from a library.
Current library books:
Beyond Fear
The Art of the Start
How can you do group development without source control? Do you have bug tracking? Automated builds? A deployment policy / methodology / sign-off (or just someone who is responsible for it)?
It sounds like you've got a group of undisciplined cowboys. Good like imposing structure on them.
Source control, and comments are absolutely required. The only reason not to do them is due to personalities, and if you have that problem, you don't have good devs.
Where is the team lead / project manager in all this? Start there. This is a leadership problem that is causing business problems (bad releases, poor quality control, poor communication, no reuse, no reproducibility, no records).
Look into sucking down some things from XP. Daily stand-up meetings, unit testing, and continuous integration would be a good start. They sound bad to cowboys, but they solve these exact problems.
The solution is to physically see your physical vote dropping into a one-way tamper-proof container.
$500? Sorry bud, if you want to keep your job, you will vote the way that the company tells you to.
This has been the PHBs wet-dream since programming began. They see writing programs as assembly. It isn't assembly. It's design. You can't automate design.
They always talk about making generic components that can just be "glued" together to create a functioning application. You can't. That "glue" is the business logic, and it's what your program does. It's what you are paying the developers to do.
If you have good developers (skilled, not monkeys) they will create (or use) libraries to do most of the heavy lifting, but they still need to put those libraries together in a way that solves a business problem. If you could just automatically glue pieces together, how can you provide a useful product for your customers? Sure, you can take an "email system" and a "social networking" system and "glue" them together, but to do what exactly? Solve some business problem perhaps? How will you "glue" them? By developing business logic.
It's like taking two different ideas / products, placing them in a room together, and expecting "synergy" to create something new and great. Even if you have some great idea about how those two things can be combined to create something, you still need someone to do the design work of actually combining them.
You wouldn't expect an air conditioner and a storage locker to just magically combine together to create a modern refrigerator, would you? You need someone smart to integrate them. That is what a developer does.
Ditto.
By your own admission, you are stretched thin and can't handle your current load. Now you want to take on new clients, but not just any new clients, new clients with large needs that you don't know how to address.
Do you really think that you are going to be able handle your current load (which you say that you can't already), the load from these 2 new big clients (whom are each about 7 times bigger than your current largest client), and be able to figure out how to change the way that you do things to meet the demands of these new clients (when do you plan to have time for this)? No, no, and no, on all counts.
Fix your staffing problems.
Serve your existing clients without killing yourself, then expand.
You are risking your current client base in order to add more business that you admittedly can't handle. You will likely ruin your existing reputation and relationships, just to pick up some clients that you can't serve. It's hard to say "no" to new business, but sometimes you have to. If you grow to fast, it will get out of control.
"Because computer source code is an expressive means for the
exchange of information and ideas about computer programming, we hold
that it is protected by the First Amendment."
By that logic, you can't patent blue-prints, schematics, technical drawings, or descriptions of a process, a method or a model. In fact, the patent application itself is "an expressive means for the exchange of information," therefore, anything that has a patent application cannot be patented.
I don't know what started companies down this path, but the ones who follow it should be shot. I've gotten calls from HR people who see my resume online, contact me, and then decide I'm not a match because I haven't made a program that interfaces with a particular database or because I don't use the same IDE that they do at the company. Come on, people, an IDE is not something that's really that difficult to get the hang of.
The problem is that no-one is willing to train anymore. Even things that aren't really training, or training that will take all of 2 hours for a good candidate are discounted. I think that it's they make a skill list for "the perfect candidate" and aren't willing to take anyone who is missing a single one of those check-boxes, even when that check-box can be filled in after a couple of hours of training, or even a day of two of playing with the product and conducting research.
Companies say that they want bold, creative, passionate, smart, and independent people, but they only hire robots. See Knocking the exuberance out of employees.
I am sure there are IT guys who know how to do this. If not, then there should be. Each and every school should not be re-inventing the wheel. There should be a board-wide policy document or guide on the preferred (or recommended) way to secure a lab. It's likely that the predecessor was just too incompetent to follow the procedure.
I call dibbs on creating a patent for opening 4 simultaneous TCP/IP sockets!
Sure thing dude, but I just filed for doing it with one click.
Ohhhhhh. You got served!
Instead of 3 concurrent streams, what about a single datastream.
We call that the network layer.
Converter box or software separates the single datastream back into the 3 (or more) original feeds.
And that would be the transport layer.
Asynchronous Programming = programming with futures
must we rename everything every time that someone "discovers" it?
this just holds information about what you like and your name, stuff like that. For all intents and purposes you are still anonymous
I think that your definition of "anonymous" is different from most people's.
This is just an example of the Tragedy of the Commons.