The 16 million moving in the US every 3 to 4 months are doing so in the knowledge they can sell their old property to someone else. It's not a net move, one person moves from point A to B, while another moves from point Z to inhabit the first person's old place A. No net loss of property. If you had to evacuate the entire Netherlands, that would be 16 million people with worthless, unsaleable property trying to take refuge elsewhere, with a net loss of the space for 16 million people to live.
Network scanning is much, MUCH harder to do with IPv6. Assuming a reasonably random assignment of v6 addresses, your local subnet has 2^64 possible addresses, in other words twice as many bits as the entirety of the world's IPv4 address space. But remember twice as many bits doesn't mean merely twice the effort, it actually means it would take 4 billion times as long to scan a *single* IPv6 subnet as it would to scan the *entire* IPv4 internet.
It's not England that stayed out of the Eurozone, it's the United Kingdom. The four countries of the UK - Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland along with England (the constituents of the United Kingdom) all use the pound sterling.
4% growth a year is exponential, any %age growth is. If growth were linear, the percentage year on year would asymptotically decrease each year, closer and closer to 0% each year.
In which case why do they bother having a physical presence in Australia? Clearly they derive benefit from doing so otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.
No, it is fair. I pay the top rate of income tax where I live, and I don't complain about it, nor do I think it's unfair that a minimum wage worker pays zero income tax (much less than me). Why? I have a LOT more to lose than a minimum wage worker if it weren't for the structures that are paid for by my taxes, such as the fire service, police, a stable regulated financial system so my savings don't get robbed etc. I use more public services than a minimum wage worker, for instance I use the roads a lot more.
But you're not a terrorist, and the real terrorists (at least, the ones that affect aviation) are absolutely obsessed with the idea of blowing up planes in flight, and not the queue waiting to go through security. So far there's only been one attack on the terminal itself in the last 20 years that I know of, and all it really resulted in was the terrorist getting badly burned and ending up in jail. But there's been several successful attacks on aircraft.
But it's not marketed as "open". Indeed, they go to pains to explain there are parts that will never be "open" in their FAQ. However, they do publish schematics and they do publish information and have a support forum for using the "bare metal", so it's more open than your typical PC. But it never has been marketed as "open", it's only ever been marketed as "affordable and easily programmable".
Farnell seem perfectly competent to me, I've been a customer for several years and I've never felt "defrauded" and all my orders have arrived when they said they would arrive.
The foundation are stuck between a rock and a hard place on the improvements issue. Since they are a non profit they don't have much wiggle room - to preannounce significant upgrades would be to do an Osbourne and potentially suffer an existential threat as people stop buying waiting for the new device.
But some volts are needed too. If you measure your skin resistance when dry with a multimeter, you'll note it's probably on the order of half a megaohm or greater. But the multimeter uses a 1.5v battery to make the measurement. If you had a hypothetical multimeter that used 240 volts to measure resistance, what you'd probably find (aside from receiving a fatal shock, if across the heart) that the skin's resistance "breaks down" and the measured resistance may be a few tens or hundreds of ohms, allowing a large current to flow.
Wet skin is a different matter of course. I used to test 9v batteries by licking the terminals, a fresh one was nearly painful, a well used or flat one would barely tickle.
Per passenger mile, modern aircraft are actually pretty efficient - they beat the average fuel consumption per passenger mile for city buses (a full bus at peak time beats a modern airliner - a packed bus is about twice as good per passenger mile compared to a modern airliner) and they significantly beat cars. Trains are only a little bit better than a modern airliner.
One advantage a train (electric, of course) does have is that if you put a nuclear power plant in, you don't have to change the rail infrastructure for the trains now to suddenly be effectively nuclear powered.
I agree with some of what you've written, but not all of it. What I agree with you is 1. the constant pestering (what a great way to kill productivity), 2. the unbearable heat in the office - we've had the same problem, and had a LOT of difficulty getting those who hold the purse strings to do something about it until legal requirements were pointed out about ventilation. It seemed like a pretty toxic work environment. I would have quit too.
However, a software developer should be able to figure out for themselves how do something like use a mixing desk without complaining about it. It ain't rocket science, and software developers are smart and *should* be able to figure it out. As a software developer, I've had to work out how to use an oscilloscope with zero documentation (and before every scope had its document on the internet) - it took me about five minutes, it's just something we should be able to figure out. Indeed, I'd expect most software developers to enjoy figuring out how to use a scope or a mixing desk or some other piece of kit.
Badly documented/badly written codebases are also pretty common, it's just something we also have to deal with. Frustrating, yes, but it's unavoidable.
Well, in this instance, Oracle had already said that Autonomy was overvalued at a mere $6bn (and has directly called the Autonomy CEO a liar - they didn't beat about the bush).
Also a short seller published a fairly detailed report about why Autonomy's numbers simply didn't add up.
So we have at least two warning signs that there was something seriously wrong with Autonomy.
Well, no - HP did have the choice, the due diligence was provably lacking:
Oracle had already rejected buying Autonomy when it was shopped to them, and publically said the Autonomy CEO had lied. This is when Autonomy tried to sell itself to Oracle for a mere $6bn. Oracle said it was "grossly overvalued".
A short seller had already seen the problems with Autonomy and written and *published* a report on why Autonomy was hugely overvalued.
The party with the shields can't actually do that.
A large nuclear attack, even if you don't receive a single warhead in retaliation, is basically suicide. Recent modelling of the nuclear winter effect has shown that the original nuclear winter scenario calculated in the 1980s (by both the Soviets and the United States) was optimistic. Indeed, a regional nuclear war with just a relative handful of Hiroshima-sized warheads on populated targets in the subtropics could result in a devastating "nuclear autumn" (think growing season shortened by 60 days in the US midwest - while this might not be civilization ending, the consequences on nations not even remotely involved in the conflict would be extremely serious). The big nuclear powers (US and Russia) are well aware of this.
If back in the Cold War the US were to annihilate the Soviet Union, without a single retaliatory warhead coming back from the Soviets, the nuclear winter would pretty much destroy the US. We're talking of mid-day daylight conditions being that of a moonlit night - nuclear winter is a bit of a misnomer, really year long nuclear night-time with lasting consequences for many years afterwards.
At the same point in Arianne's life (the 4th launch), one Arianne 5 had exploded and not reached orbit, one had partially failed and there had been two successes.
It's too early days to say whether the Falcon will be more or less reliable than Arianne 5 (which now has a proven track record).
That'll be a long way off. Until machines have sufficient AI to understand context well, machine translation (even good machine translation) will be clumsy. You'll speak, your translator will have to listen to the whole sentence (due to things like word ordering differences between different languages, it can't really start to translate halfway through in many cases), then repeat what you said to the other person. He speaks and the process repeats. The conversation goes at a fraction of the speed of even someone who has learned the other person's language to even just intermediate level. (Human translators, for example in the UN or EU parliament, can start translating much sooner because they understand the context and will know where a sentence is going long before it's complete. Indeed, I have a lot of respect for these translators. Earlier in the year I was at Euskal Encounter in Spain, and I went to a see a talk about chiptunes with two friends who don't speak Spanish. So I translated real-time, trying to do with the UN translators do. Within 10 minutes I had a thundering headache, it was hard work to keep switching languages like that even though the subject was reasonably technical and didn't need anything much idiomatic in either language. I expect it gets easier if you do it a lot).
Now this machine translation will be fine (and undoubtedly very useful) if you're a tourist or in business situations where you don't need to talk too much, but if you need regular contact with someone who speaks a different language to you, until these translators have hard AI and can actually understand context, conversations will be so much more productive if at least one side has learned the others language.
Vista wasn't a failure. From a commercial point of view, it was a roaring success.
Since Microsoft has such complete dominance over the desktop, making money with Windows is about as hard as falling off a log. While desktops might not be the growth market they once were, Microsoft could put out a complete turd and it will still fly off the shelves because of OEM installs. Despite everyone moaning about Windows 8, it'll fly off the shelves. I've seen it all before; everyone moaned about the transition to Windows 95 and training costs, but it was still hugely successful thanks to OEM sales. Even Windows ME was a roaring success, commercially. Everyone moans, but OEMs still install it and MS are guaranteed to turn a big profit off even the worst version of Windows.
What you have to understand is this. When the airlines talk of a pilot shortage, what they are saying is "There are only 20 applicants for each job". Normally, there are 200 applicants for each job.
The thing is most people who fly *really want to fly* and will practically prostitute themselves just to be in the air. This causes several bad things to happen. For instance, the majority of flight instructors aren't instructing because they want to, they are instructing merely to build hours to get that airline job. This means many private pilots are being trained by instructors with a few hundred hours, who aren't good teachers and have no interest in actual teaching. (This is why I found a grizzled old freelance instructor who did instruction as something on the side to his main job as an engineer, he was instructing because he cared about instructing, and also had thousands of hours of experience). That's not to say all young instructors with their eyes on the airlines are like this -- there are some who really do care, and continue to instruct after they get the coveted airline job. But at the same time, whenever I go for a checkout to rent a plane somewhere, it's not unusual that I have three times the hours than the instructor who is checking me out, and a much broader depth of experience. Aspiring airline pilots also take on some other pretty awful flying jobs such as flying canceled checks around in marginally airworthy aircraft in weather conditions they have no business flying in (single pilot IFR in a marginally airworthy light twin is pretty risky). I get the impression that half the aspiring commercial pilots would do these jobs for free, or even pay for the privilege.
Because there's never really a shortage of pilots as most normal people understand it, even during times of "pilot shortage", the pilots of smaller airliners (think the small turboprop aircraft feeding into airline hubs) are paid peanuts. You can make more as a first level supervisor at Mc.Donald's than you can as an airline first officer in these outfits. It's not until you have quite a lot of seniority and are flying a jet do you actually get a liveable wage.
That doesn't make sense. We don't pay for *incoming* phone calls on a mobile phone in Britain (or on a landline phone for that matter). You only pay for *outgoing* calls.
The US is sitting on large amounts of *unconventional* oil. The oil we need for the current business-as-usual needs to be cheap, conventional oil though.
"Unconventional oil" is a euphemism for "expensive oil". The reason this oil is not being exploited at the moment is that it is far too expensive to extract while there is cheap conventional oil left. Not only is this oil not cheap, it cannot be extracted at a very high rate. It also needs large energy inputs to extract. Most of it may not even be worth extracting (as in it may take more than 1 barrel of oil energy equivalent to extract it).
Just to give you an idea of the difference in extraction RATE between unconventional oil and conventional, Canada's proven reserves is 1000 times larger than Mexico's Cantarell field. But after decades of expensive development, the output *rate* of these oil fields only equals that of Cantarell at its peak. You could have infinite oil but if you can't extract it quickly and cheaply, it's not going to solve the economics of energy production.
Planes aren't ever made from steel (too heavy). Aluminium bends for a while then goes with a very loud bang. (See the video of the 777 wing test). CF also bends for a while and eventually goes bang.
Gliders have been made out of composites for decades now, they have to be very strong and very light. Watch a 30m span glider in flight and see how the wing bends. The 787 head on looks very glider like with the graceful curve to the wings as they take the load.
Slashdot Mirror
The 16 million moving in the US every 3 to 4 months are doing so in the knowledge they can sell their old property to someone else. It's not a net move, one person moves from point A to B, while another moves from point Z to inhabit the first person's old place A. No net loss of property. If you had to evacuate the entire Netherlands, that would be 16 million people with worthless, unsaleable property trying to take refuge elsewhere, with a net loss of the space for 16 million people to live.
Network scanning is much, MUCH harder to do with IPv6. Assuming a reasonably random assignment of v6 addresses, your local subnet has 2^64 possible addresses, in other words twice as many bits as the entirety of the world's IPv4 address space. But remember twice as many bits doesn't mean merely twice the effort, it actually means it would take 4 billion times as long to scan a *single* IPv6 subnet as it would to scan the *entire* IPv4 internet.
It's not England that stayed out of the Eurozone, it's the United Kingdom. The four countries of the UK - Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland along with England (the constituents of the United Kingdom) all use the pound sterling.
4% growth a year is exponential, any %age growth is. If growth were linear, the percentage year on year would asymptotically decrease each year, closer and closer to 0% each year.
In which case why do they bother having a physical presence in Australia? Clearly they derive benefit from doing so otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.
No, it is fair. I pay the top rate of income tax where I live, and I don't complain about it, nor do I think it's unfair that a minimum wage worker pays zero income tax (much less than me). Why? I have a LOT more to lose than a minimum wage worker if it weren't for the structures that are paid for by my taxes, such as the fire service, police, a stable regulated financial system so my savings don't get robbed etc. I use more public services than a minimum wage worker, for instance I use the roads a lot more.
But you're not a terrorist, and the real terrorists (at least, the ones that affect aviation) are absolutely obsessed with the idea of blowing up planes in flight, and not the queue waiting to go through security. So far there's only been one attack on the terminal itself in the last 20 years that I know of, and all it really resulted in was the terrorist getting badly burned and ending up in jail. But there's been several successful attacks on aircraft.
But it's not marketed as "open". Indeed, they go to pains to explain there are parts that will never be "open" in their FAQ. However, they do publish schematics and they do publish information and have a support forum for using the "bare metal", so it's more open than your typical PC. But it never has been marketed as "open", it's only ever been marketed as "affordable and easily programmable".
Farnell seem perfectly competent to me, I've been a customer for several years and I've never felt "defrauded" and all my orders have arrived when they said they would arrive.
The foundation are stuck between a rock and a hard place on the improvements issue. Since they are a non profit they don't have much wiggle room - to preannounce significant upgrades would be to do an Osbourne and potentially suffer an existential threat as people stop buying waiting for the new device.
Electrocute is a portmanteu of "electro" and "execute", execute in this context meaning kill.
You've been shocked several times, not electrocuted.
But some volts are needed too. If you measure your skin resistance when dry with a multimeter, you'll note it's probably on the order of half a megaohm or greater. But the multimeter uses a 1.5v battery to make the measurement. If you had a hypothetical multimeter that used 240 volts to measure resistance, what you'd probably find (aside from receiving a fatal shock, if across the heart) that the skin's resistance "breaks down" and the measured resistance may be a few tens or hundreds of ohms, allowing a large current to flow.
Wet skin is a different matter of course. I used to test 9v batteries by licking the terminals, a fresh one was nearly painful, a well used or flat one would barely tickle.
Per passenger mile, modern aircraft are actually pretty efficient - they beat the average fuel consumption per passenger mile for city buses (a full bus at peak time beats a modern airliner - a packed bus is about twice as good per passenger mile compared to a modern airliner) and they significantly beat cars. Trains are only a little bit better than a modern airliner.
One advantage a train (electric, of course) does have is that if you put a nuclear power plant in, you don't have to change the rail infrastructure for the trains now to suddenly be effectively nuclear powered.
I agree with some of what you've written, but not all of it. What I agree with you is 1. the constant pestering (what a great way to kill productivity), 2. the unbearable heat in the office - we've had the same problem, and had a LOT of difficulty getting those who hold the purse strings to do something about it until legal requirements were pointed out about ventilation. It seemed like a pretty toxic work environment. I would have quit too.
However, a software developer should be able to figure out for themselves how do something like use a mixing desk without complaining about it. It ain't rocket science, and software developers are smart and *should* be able to figure it out. As a software developer, I've had to work out how to use an oscilloscope with zero documentation (and before every scope had its document on the internet) - it took me about five minutes, it's just something we should be able to figure out. Indeed, I'd expect most software developers to enjoy figuring out how to use a scope or a mixing desk or some other piece of kit.
Badly documented/badly written codebases are also pretty common, it's just something we also have to deal with. Frustrating, yes, but it's unavoidable.
Well, in this instance, Oracle had already said that Autonomy was overvalued at a mere $6bn (and has directly called the Autonomy CEO a liar - they didn't beat about the bush).
Also a short seller published a fairly detailed report about why Autonomy's numbers simply didn't add up.
So we have at least two warning signs that there was something seriously wrong with Autonomy.
Well, no - HP did have the choice, the due diligence was provably lacking:
Oracle had already rejected buying Autonomy when it was shopped to them, and publically said the Autonomy CEO had lied. This is when Autonomy tried to sell itself to Oracle for a mere $6bn. Oracle said it was "grossly overvalued".
A short seller had already seen the problems with Autonomy and written and *published* a report on why Autonomy was hugely overvalued.
Autonomy is not a startup, it's been around for a while now.
A colleague of mine has related other poor behaviour by Autonomy from back in 2004.
The party with the shields can't actually do that.
A large nuclear attack, even if you don't receive a single warhead in retaliation, is basically suicide. Recent modelling of the nuclear winter effect has shown that the original nuclear winter scenario calculated in the 1980s (by both the Soviets and the United States) was optimistic. Indeed, a regional nuclear war with just a relative handful of Hiroshima-sized warheads on populated targets in the subtropics could result in a devastating "nuclear autumn" (think growing season shortened by 60 days in the US midwest - while this might not be civilization ending, the consequences on nations not even remotely involved in the conflict would be extremely serious). The big nuclear powers (US and Russia) are well aware of this.
If back in the Cold War the US were to annihilate the Soviet Union, without a single retaliatory warhead coming back from the Soviets, the nuclear winter would pretty much destroy the US. We're talking of mid-day daylight conditions being that of a moonlit night - nuclear winter is a bit of a misnomer, really year long nuclear night-time with lasting consequences for many years afterwards.
At the same point in Arianne's life (the 4th launch), one Arianne 5 had exploded and not reached orbit, one had partially failed and there had been two successes.
It's too early days to say whether the Falcon will be more or less reliable than Arianne 5 (which now has a proven track record).
That'll be a long way off. Until machines have sufficient AI to understand context well, machine translation (even good machine translation) will be clumsy. You'll speak, your translator will have to listen to the whole sentence (due to things like word ordering differences between different languages, it can't really start to translate halfway through in many cases), then repeat what you said to the other person. He speaks and the process repeats. The conversation goes at a fraction of the speed of even someone who has learned the other person's language to even just intermediate level. (Human translators, for example in the UN or EU parliament, can start translating much sooner because they understand the context and will know where a sentence is going long before it's complete. Indeed, I have a lot of respect for these translators. Earlier in the year I was at Euskal Encounter in Spain, and I went to a see a talk about chiptunes with two friends who don't speak Spanish. So I translated real-time, trying to do with the UN translators do. Within 10 minutes I had a thundering headache, it was hard work to keep switching languages like that even though the subject was reasonably technical and didn't need anything much idiomatic in either language. I expect it gets easier if you do it a lot).
Now this machine translation will be fine (and undoubtedly very useful) if you're a tourist or in business situations where you don't need to talk too much, but if you need regular contact with someone who speaks a different language to you, until these translators have hard AI and can actually understand context, conversations will be so much more productive if at least one side has learned the others language.
Vista wasn't a failure. From a commercial point of view, it was a roaring success.
Since Microsoft has such complete dominance over the desktop, making money with Windows is about as hard as falling off a log. While desktops might not be the growth market they once were, Microsoft could put out a complete turd and it will still fly off the shelves because of OEM installs. Despite everyone moaning about Windows 8, it'll fly off the shelves. I've seen it all before; everyone moaned about the transition to Windows 95 and training costs, but it was still hugely successful thanks to OEM sales. Even Windows ME was a roaring success, commercially. Everyone moans, but OEMs still install it and MS are guaranteed to turn a big profit off even the worst version of Windows.
What you have to understand is this. When the airlines talk of a pilot shortage, what they are saying is "There are only 20 applicants for each job". Normally, there are 200 applicants for each job.
The thing is most people who fly *really want to fly* and will practically prostitute themselves just to be in the air. This causes several bad things to happen. For instance, the majority of flight instructors aren't instructing because they want to, they are instructing merely to build hours to get that airline job. This means many private pilots are being trained by instructors with a few hundred hours, who aren't good teachers and have no interest in actual teaching. (This is why I found a grizzled old freelance instructor who did instruction as something on the side to his main job as an engineer, he was instructing because he cared about instructing, and also had thousands of hours of experience). That's not to say all young instructors with their eyes on the airlines are like this -- there are some who really do care, and continue to instruct after they get the coveted airline job. But at the same time, whenever I go for a checkout to rent a plane somewhere, it's not unusual that I have three times the hours than the instructor who is checking me out, and a much broader depth of experience. Aspiring airline pilots also take on some other pretty awful flying jobs such as flying canceled checks around in marginally airworthy aircraft in weather conditions they have no business flying in (single pilot IFR in a marginally airworthy light twin is pretty risky). I get the impression that half the aspiring commercial pilots would do these jobs for free, or even pay for the privilege.
Because there's never really a shortage of pilots as most normal people understand it, even during times of "pilot shortage", the pilots of smaller airliners (think the small turboprop aircraft feeding into airline hubs) are paid peanuts. You can make more as a first level supervisor at Mc.Donald's than you can as an airline first officer in these outfits. It's not until you have quite a lot of seniority and are flying a jet do you actually get a liveable wage.
That doesn't make sense. We don't pay for *incoming* phone calls on a mobile phone in Britain (or on a landline phone for that matter). You only pay for *outgoing* calls.
Good. We need to get rid of the nuclear submarines, they are a complete waste of money.
The US is sitting on large amounts of *unconventional* oil. The oil we need for the current business-as-usual needs to be cheap, conventional oil though.
"Unconventional oil" is a euphemism for "expensive oil". The reason this oil is not being exploited at the moment is that it is far too expensive to extract while there is cheap conventional oil left. Not only is this oil not cheap, it cannot be extracted at a very high rate. It also needs large energy inputs to extract. Most of it may not even be worth extracting (as in it may take more than 1 barrel of oil energy equivalent to extract it).
Just to give you an idea of the difference in extraction RATE between unconventional oil and conventional, Canada's proven reserves is 1000 times larger than Mexico's Cantarell field. But after decades of expensive development, the output *rate* of these oil fields only equals that of Cantarell at its peak. You could have infinite oil but if you can't extract it quickly and cheaply, it's not going to solve the economics of energy production.
Planes aren't ever made from steel (too heavy). Aluminium bends for a while then goes with a very loud bang. (See the video of the 777 wing test). CF also bends for a while and eventually goes bang.
Gliders have been made out of composites for decades now, they have to be very strong and very light. Watch a 30m span glider in flight and see how the wing bends. The 787 head on looks very glider like with the graceful curve to the wings as they take the load.