That's a good point, but I've always drawn a firm line. I won't let you cross the line between money and safety, law and life. Damaging a rocket, and letting everyone know that you've damaged it, doesn't have any life/safety consequences. In my world, Bob would have sabotaged the shuttle, been fired, and everyone would have moved on. We celebrate a russion who didn't push a button for the same reason.
My hyperbole was "rifle" and "shoot". Those are dangerous terms. "Obviously sabotage" is what I wanted to communicate.
As for the anarchy of it all, you know, I don't think it just jumps to anarchy. Bob still gets fired for the sabotage, as anyone would for breaking that chain of command. So you've got to be willing to take those consequences, and fight them out after-the-fact. And I do believe that a very quick system would appear on its own -- was the person an expert/in-the-know? then we accept their heart-felt belief as an excuse from the "criminal" qualification, and we simply label it, at worst, an on-the-job mistake.
Someone's got to be responsible for catching these types of dangers. Perhaps the big-wigs didn't understand the warnings. Pehaps Bob had a cold and sneezed and wasn't entirely understood. Perhaps the big-wig was ill that day and not thinking straight. At some point, we need to allow people the ability to save others. We're not talking about an intern, or a student, or someone from far away. We're talking about someone on-the-ground, right there, touching it.
I was 6 years old, and interested in space tech. I became very aware of what had happened, and it shaped my life. I learned a valuable lesson from Bob.
The lesson I learned wasn't to listen to warnings, or to double-check things. The lesson I learned was to stand my ground through escalation.
Bob did his job. And had he been a psychopath, he could have been happy with what he did. But that's not me -- because of these events.
In my case, yes I'd have grabbed my hunting rifle. But I wouldn't have walked into NASA offices with it. You don't believe me that it's going to blow up from the cold, fine. Bang. Now it's going to blow up from that hole that I just shot into it.
I've followed this lesson quite a few times in my career, and in my life. Being willing to sabotage my own interests (clients, projects, money, property, relationships) in order to do what I strongly believed was the right thing has ensured that I sleep really damned well, each and every night.
Thank you Bob, for giving me the lesson that would shape much of my life.
Are you the same coward from before? Or a different one? Can't have a discussion without knowing to how many persons I'm speaking.
If you aren't willing to put your name to your opinion, then your opinion has zero value. That's consistent with your not knowing what a registration achieves.
I never said they can't. I said they don't. If you look outside your window today, for the whole day, how many planes will you see up high? If you're anywhere near a city, you'll see between 10 and 1'000. How many geese will you see at a similar altitude? I'll bet on zero.
Like I said, it's about behaviour, not about capability.
Even when the geese migrate here, they do so at an altitude of 100 feet.
Words have meaning. You can't just switch them around as you did.
None of the thirty checks that I just read about it are checks for bugs. They are all checks for untested code.
Every one of those "problems" -- and they are almost all simple mis-types -- are easily spotted by the very first time the developer tests that line of code.
Ultimately, I'm sure it's a very valuable tool for a company with developers who never test the code that they write.
On the other hand, since I test every line of code that I write, often as I'm writing it, it can't possibly test the bugs that I wind up producing -- which are all interactive bugs across features.
Umm, getting a machine to run on pure hydrogen fuel was never a challenge. Supplying the hydrogen to the machine, especially via the user, now that's the challenge.
Was good enough for 50 years. Not worth risking screwing it up. There's a cost, in terms of compatibility and memory and glitches and anomalies. You've admitted that 99.99% of it is english, there simply isn't enough value is the proposed benefit.
There's absolutely nothing new here, it's a BBS, nothing more. It worked on my 2400 BAUD. New technology doesn't make old content any more valuable. It's just shinier. I like a matte finish -- they show fewer fingerprints.
26 years ago, I was 12 years old, sitting with my 9 year-old sister, on the carpet of our parents' bedroom, watching tvision via UHF -- how's that for dating myself?
A commercial came on, for what I do not recall, and as with nearly ALL commercials back then, it ended with a big giant telephone number. But unlike most, it had a small domain name beneath. I turned to my baby-sister and said "look sis', one day that domain name will be bigger than the telephone number".
A year later, I had started my web development business. Today, I'm happy, successful, completely self-taught, and all is good.
Obama's way too late. If school children today begin to learn to program, in twenty years from now, they'll be the perfect blue-collar drones that pick tomatoes today.
So you live in a country that's immigrating vast numbers of people from china and india, and you want to focus your children on programming 26 years too late.
Instead, why not notice that your country was built on manufacturing, and now you've got no one left to do the "unskilled" jobs, you know, the ones that no one knows how to do anymore. Like the brick-laying, that is probably the highest-paying job in the whole of the U.S.A. -- considering education costs of course. I think you're paying $80/hour for brick laying these days?
In the past, spam was mass-flung with no real power. Filtering it was a relatively easy task, with an acceptable false positive rate and an even more acceptable false negative rate.
Today, while those spams still exist, between e-mail client junk folders and greylisting, the mass-flung spam is little more than an annoyance -- it doesn't have any real negative effect in term of dollars. Virus scanners catch those attachments pretty well too.
But now we have spear phishing -- real-world big-business, hand-crafted, artisan spamming. No spam filter is ever able to catch any of those. And they do real damage creating real monetary losses for big and small business alike.
So if your spam filtering business can catch the easy ones that do no real damage, and can't catch the hard ones that do the real big damage, then who's your paying market?
...so I'll say it again. Your front door is protected by a 5-digit key, and it's next to a few dozen glass windows.
Maybe two of my passwords actually protect something more valuable than my house when I'm not in my house. None of them protect anything more valuable than my house when I am in my house.
Oh, I also said that what separates my 140kph car from an on-coming 140kph car is a 3inch wide strip of yellow paint. Sometimes two of them.
games are always better for teaching. have them program mastermind, and other real-world logic-based games. They'll learn the logic of programming from the logic of reality.
Instantaneous is always a mathematical construct. It does not exist in the real world. So you can call it an average, or a determination, or an expectation, depending on what you've actually done in order to calculate it. But since you didn't measure it over an instant, there's no difference between measuring ten times per second and describing the middle, or measuring three times a year and describing august. You don't know what the velocity was at that instant, because that's not actually measurable. You're always averaging over time.
If you measured 100 times per second, the object could still have suddenly come to a dead-stop for 0.005s and you'd never notice. In fact, it could have come to a dead-stop every 0.01s for 0.005s. So it could actually be going twice as fast as you measure, half the time, and be a dead zero for the other half, and you'd have no idea.
To magnify that to macroscopic levels, if I make $10'000 every second month ($60'000 per year), my average instantaneous revenue is $5'000 per month. Except I'm still broke in January, until the end of February, before I get my first pay-cheque. So I don't have $5'000 on February 1st. But you didn't look on February 1st. You looked on March 1st, saw $10'000 in my bank. From that, you can "average" the monthly, but you cannot "determine" the monthly.
units should not be picked to a standard. Units should be picked to the actual unit measured -- not the accuracy. Accuracy should be in significant digits. Units should be in what was actually measured. If you measured around the world one mm at a time, then yeah, use mm, because that's what you used. There's nothing wrong with more numbers. There is something wrong with expressing something that you didn't do. That's why my GPS doesn't know my speed when I'm on a steep hill, it's totally wrong.
Standards are only useful when relating to others using the same standard. That benefit comes at the cost of comprehension. That works in math, and pure math alone. It doesn't work in any applied science.
The shorter the ruler, the longer the shoreline.
The door can't be half open, just like it can't be half closed. There are threshhold effects in this world. Every time you average, you eliminate the possibility of a threshhold effect.
...in a single instance, you didn't go anywhere. Over t=0, d=0 too -- always.
That makes the term "instantaneous velocity" an oxymoron.
You don't have a speedometer than can measure speed instantly. It can only measure speed over some period of time. You, as a human, can believe it to be instantaneous, and you can treat it as such, but it remains not so.
...and that would be the incorrect part. That's my point. They aren't measuring anything per hour. They could. My GPS does -- says distance covered in the last hour. But the speedometer doesn't. I don't know what the measurement frequency is for a typical speedometer. I do know that it can't drop from 200kph to 10kph in less than a second, so the physical needle is, in and of itself, an average due to a physical lag. I would presume that, like a bicycle, the speedometer measures axel revolutions, multiplied by expected tire circumference. In which case, I would expect it to measure each rotation.
All I wanted to say is that in order to measure 30 km per hour, you must be measuring both 30km and 1 hour. You can't measure 30km/h in 1 second -- it'll actually take you a whole hour to measure 30 km per hour. That is all. Everything else was merely conversationally part of the examples.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a good point, but I've always drawn a firm line. I won't let you cross the line between money and safety, law and life. Damaging a rocket, and letting everyone know that you've damaged it, doesn't have any life/safety consequences. In my world, Bob would have sabotaged the shuttle, been fired, and everyone would have moved on. We celebrate a russion who didn't push a button for the same reason.
My hyperbole was "rifle" and "shoot". Those are dangerous terms. "Obviously sabotage" is what I wanted to communicate.
As for the anarchy of it all, you know, I don't think it just jumps to anarchy. Bob still gets fired for the sabotage, as anyone would for breaking that chain of command. So you've got to be willing to take those consequences, and fight them out after-the-fact. And I do believe that a very quick system would appear on its own -- was the person an expert/in-the-know? then we accept their heart-felt belief as an excuse from the "criminal" qualification, and we simply label it, at worst, an on-the-job mistake.
Someone's got to be responsible for catching these types of dangers. Perhaps the big-wigs didn't understand the warnings. Pehaps Bob had a cold and sneezed and wasn't entirely understood. Perhaps the big-wig was ill that day and not thinking straight. At some point, we need to allow people the ability to save others. We're not talking about an intern, or a student, or someone from far away. We're talking about someone on-the-ground, right there, touching it.
I was 6 years old, and interested in space tech. I became very aware of what had happened, and it shaped my life. I learned a valuable lesson from Bob.
The lesson I learned wasn't to listen to warnings, or to double-check things. The lesson I learned was to stand my ground through escalation.
Bob did his job. And had he been a psychopath, he could have been happy with what he did. But that's not me -- because of these events.
In my case, yes I'd have grabbed my hunting rifle. But I wouldn't have walked into NASA offices with it. You don't believe me that it's going to blow up from the cold, fine. Bang. Now it's going to blow up from that hole that I just shot into it.
I've followed this lesson quite a few times in my career, and in my life. Being willing to sabotage my own interests (clients, projects, money, property, relationships) in order to do what I strongly believed was the right thing has ensured that I sleep really damned well, each and every night.
Thank you Bob, for giving me the lesson that would shape much of my life.
Are you the same coward from before? Or a different one? Can't have a discussion without knowing to how many persons I'm speaking.
If you aren't willing to put your name to your opinion, then your opinion has zero value. That's consistent with your not knowing what a registration achieves.
I never said they can't. I said they don't. If you look outside your window today, for the whole day, how many planes will you see up high? If you're anywhere near a city, you'll see between 10 and 1'000. How many geese will you see at a similar altitude? I'll bet on zero.
Like I said, it's about behaviour, not about capability.
Even when the geese migrate here, they do so at an altitude of 100 feet.
Words have meaning. You can't just switch them around as you did.
Forget about the liklihood of damage, look at the difference in behaviour.
Birds don't fly high, most of the time. They stay near food, near home, and near safety. Drones go as high as possible for the best vantage point.
Birds would, on their own, attempt to stay away from large noisy planes. Drones won't.
They are not comparable at all.
None of the thirty checks that I just read about it are checks for bugs. They are all checks for untested code.
Every one of those "problems" -- and they are almost all simple mis-types -- are easily spotted by the very first time the developer tests that line of code.
Ultimately, I'm sure it's a very valuable tool for a company with developers who never test the code that they write.
On the other hand, since I test every line of code that I write, often as I'm writing it, it can't possibly test the bugs that I wind up producing -- which are all interactive bugs across features.
Of course, I ain't in C.
Umm, getting a machine to run on pure hydrogen fuel was never a challenge. Supplying the hydrogen to the machine, especially via the user, now that's the challenge.
it doesn't specify "all". you infered that for no reason.
How about: "patients had to come in".
When english fails: "patients had had to come in in person for results".
Could have just said: "patients had to come in person for results". ...and then we actually would have understood it without ten-times the brain power.
Was good enough for 50 years. Not worth risking screwing it up. There's a cost, in terms of compatibility and memory and glitches and anomalies. You've admitted that 99.99% of it is english, there simply isn't enough value is the proposed benefit.
There's absolutely nothing new here, it's a BBS, nothing more. It worked on my 2400 BAUD. New technology doesn't make old content any more valuable. It's just shinier. I like a matte finish -- they show fewer fingerprints.
It's a public news feed. It needn't be secure.
It's english, it needn't any more than ascii.
it meets every need I have, and every desire I, err, desire. Don't change it at all.
26 years ago, I was 12 years old, sitting with my 9 year-old sister, on the carpet of our parents' bedroom, watching tvision via UHF -- how's that for dating myself?
A commercial came on, for what I do not recall, and as with nearly ALL commercials back then, it ended with a big giant telephone number. But unlike most, it had a small domain name beneath. I turned to my baby-sister and said "look sis', one day that domain name will be bigger than the telephone number".
A year later, I had started my web development business. Today, I'm happy, successful, completely self-taught, and all is good.
Obama's way too late. If school children today begin to learn to program, in twenty years from now, they'll be the perfect blue-collar drones that pick tomatoes today.
So you live in a country that's immigrating vast numbers of people from china and india, and you want to focus your children on programming 26 years too late.
Instead, why not notice that your country was built on manufacturing, and now you've got no one left to do the "unskilled" jobs, you know, the ones that no one knows how to do anymore. Like the brick-laying, that is probably the highest-paying job in the whole of the U.S.A. -- considering education costs of course. I think you're paying $80/hour for brick laying these days?
In the past, spam was mass-flung with no real power. Filtering it was a relatively easy task, with an acceptable false positive rate and an even more acceptable false negative rate.
Today, while those spams still exist, between e-mail client junk folders and greylisting, the mass-flung spam is little more than an annoyance -- it doesn't have any real negative effect in term of dollars. Virus scanners catch those attachments pretty well too.
But now we have spear phishing -- real-world big-business, hand-crafted, artisan spamming. No spam filter is ever able to catch any of those. And they do real damage creating real monetary losses for big and small business alike.
So if your spam filtering business can catch the easy ones that do no real damage, and can't catch the hard ones that do the real big damage, then who's your paying market?
...it'll cost nothing to build, nothing to maintain, there'll be no loss along the way, nothing will go wrong, and it'll last forever.
I think somewhere along the way, someone forgot that storing fuel is more efficient, not less. That's why every living plant and animal does it.
...so I'll say it again. Your front door is protected by a 5-digit key, and it's next to a few dozen glass windows.
Maybe two of my passwords actually protect something more valuable than my house when I'm not in my house. None of them protect anything more valuable than my house when I am in my house.
Oh, I also said that what separates my 140kph car from an on-coming 140kph car is a 3inch wide strip of yellow paint. Sometimes two of them.
games are always better for teaching. have them program mastermind, and other real-world logic-based games. They'll learn the logic of programming from the logic of reality.
Instantaneous is always a mathematical construct. It does not exist in the real world. So you can call it an average, or a determination, or an expectation, depending on what you've actually done in order to calculate it. But since you didn't measure it over an instant, there's no difference between measuring ten times per second and describing the middle, or measuring three times a year and describing august. You don't know what the velocity was at that instant, because that's not actually measurable. You're always averaging over time.
If you measured 100 times per second, the object could still have suddenly come to a dead-stop for 0.005s and you'd never notice. In fact, it could have come to a dead-stop every 0.01s for 0.005s. So it could actually be going twice as fast as you measure, half the time, and be a dead zero for the other half, and you'd have no idea.
To magnify that to macroscopic levels, if I make $10'000 every second month ($60'000 per year), my average instantaneous revenue is $5'000 per month. Except I'm still broke in January, until the end of February, before I get my first pay-cheque. So I don't have $5'000 on February 1st. But you didn't look on February 1st. You looked on March 1st, saw $10'000 in my bank. From that, you can "average" the monthly, but you cannot "determine" the monthly.
units should not be picked to a standard. Units should be picked to the actual unit measured -- not the accuracy. Accuracy should be in significant digits. Units should be in what was actually measured. If you measured around the world one mm at a time, then yeah, use mm, because that's what you used. There's nothing wrong with more numbers. There is something wrong with expressing something that you didn't do. That's why my GPS doesn't know my speed when I'm on a steep hill, it's totally wrong.
Standards are only useful when relating to others using the same standard. That benefit comes at the cost of comprehension. That works in math, and pure math alone. It doesn't work in any applied science.
The shorter the ruler, the longer the shoreline.
The door can't be half open, just like it can't be half closed. There are threshhold effects in this world. Every time you average, you eliminate the possibility of a threshhold effect.
...in a single instance, you didn't go anywhere. Over t=0, d=0 too -- always.
That makes the term "instantaneous velocity" an oxymoron.
You don't have a speedometer than can measure speed instantly. It can only measure speed over some period of time. You, as a human, can believe it to be instantaneous, and you can treat it as such, but it remains not so.
...and that would be the incorrect part. That's my point. They aren't measuring anything per hour. They could. My GPS does -- says distance covered in the last hour. But the speedometer doesn't. I don't know what the measurement frequency is for a typical speedometer. I do know that it can't drop from 200kph to 10kph in less than a second, so the physical needle is, in and of itself, an average due to a physical lag. I would presume that, like a bicycle, the speedometer measures axel revolutions, multiplied by expected tire circumference. In which case, I would expect it to measure each rotation.
All I wanted to say is that in order to measure 30 km per hour, you must be measuring both 30km and 1 hour. You can't measure 30km/h in 1 second -- it'll actually take you a whole hour to measure 30 km per hour. That is all. Everything else was merely conversationally part of the examples.
heh, I'll bet they do agree -- it was most incredible indeed!