Xerox made copy machines, they still make copy machines, and they seem be be doing well enough. Would the situation have been different if they didn't make Xerox PARC?
A blunder would imply they did something particularly stupid. They didn't. They invested some of their excess money in researching promising technology, millions of things could have gone wrong, turned out it was marketing, well, too bad, but it is not like Xerox completely disappeared. From the point of view of Xerox, it was certainly a failed experiment, but that's a controlled failure, hardly a blunder.
It is like calling the Apple Newton a blunder because the Palm Pilot took most of its success. Yes, it was a failure, but it didn't prevent them from turning it into the resounding success that was the iPhone 20 years later.
I don't know, just about every DJs I have seen (in person and in pictures) have a MacBook proudly exposed on stage. Some use no computer at all, but I've yet to see a professional DJ with a Windows PC. They may be using Windows PCs behind the scenes but the Apple logo is still shown to millions of spectators.
Because people don't realize something changed unless the appearance changed. I think I've read that in an interview of someone from Microsoft. He gave the Windows calculator as an example: when they started using rational numbers internally in order to avoid rounding errors, no one noticed, because the UI stayed the same. I have a personal example of the opposite. We maintain an issue at work (a modified version of Mantis). Our last update was a massive improvement according to users. In fact, the only thing that changed significantly was the style, by that I mean colors and shapes, nothing functional.
I found the "fuck gesture" to be a very clear way of interacting with people. For example, if you meet some UI designers from Google, it can be used to show how much you appreciate their work.
Part of a sysadmin job is to fix the mess of others, get lied to and deal with incompetents.
Sometimes, you'll have to fix a problem, and no one will be there to help you. You are the expert, you are supposed to fix problems, not the other way around. When asked, people will invariably tell you they did nothing. If there is some problem you can't fix (ex: that "read only" attribute), you'll probably have to tell the person who can fix it exactly what to do. Either because that person doesn't know (remember, you are the expert), or because he is some kind of higher up who specifically hired you not to waste his time.
Any Unicode string should be accepted as a password. It includes emoji and any piece of weirdness Unicode has to offer. The only thing is that the string should be normalized first, this is because there are cases where the same character can have different representations: for example, é can be represented both as a single code point or something like e combined with '.
Drugs are patented for 20 years, it means that in the ideal case where your competitor didn't find something better your "recurring revenue" is going to be severely cut down by cheap generics after your patent expire. If you develop a cure however, you are going to completely destroy your competition, and get a good backlog of already ill patients to treat. Sure, it won't last, but neither will your patent. So the ones who aren't getting rich are the ones who make generics, you get to keep all the profits.
When researchers compiled a huge database of the digital habits of teams at Microsoft, they found that the clearest warning sign of an ineffective manager was being slow to answer emails.
A manager manages. They are the interface between the working team and the rest of the world, they have to process email, it's their job. The manager is here so that the other members of the team don't have to respond to outside communication and focus on their own job instead.
Are you joking? There are a lot of bad actors who are much worse than Google and Facebook. A significant part of them aren't even aware of how bad they are.
Facebook and Google are huge targets. They are under high scrutiny because everything they do have a million times more impact than the same thing done in mom's and pop's website.
I've seen so many appalling things being done simply because of incompetence: password recovery methods sending you your plain text password, mailing list using the "cc" field, exposing hundreds of addresses, a real estate agency exposing all their customer data in a windows network share on an open WiFi network,... Some small companies that simply never heard about protection of personal data. These are all small scale but as a whole, they probably end up doing more damage than Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft combined. Ending that kind small scale of abuse is a large part of GDPR btw. Things like the Data Protection Officer requirement (who doesn't have to be a new hire) is just a way to tell companies, big or small, to actually care.
TFA "Since the data is kept in memory in the browser process, a malicious website could try to exhaust the memory of the browser process and make it more likely to crash" Google is the best at algorithms, how could they miss checking such an obvious trait and ensure the FS does not go over x MB?
They didn't miss it, quite the opposite, it is a potential problem they identified for a solution that isn't out yet. As for limiting to x MB, it is exactly what they intend to do, but while it is an obvious solution, finding the value of x isn't.
It seems that a spoonful of RoundUp wouldn't be so bad but a few of them (>85mL) could be fatal. The surfactant POEA makes it more toxic than just glyphosate.
So yeah, you could take the dare, that would be stupid but not enough to earn you a Darwin award.
Electron is an excellent choice. The recommended specs for Windows 95 are a 486 CPU, 8MB of RAM. Thanks to Electron, we can get close to that level of performance with our modern high end PCs.
Medicine remains seriously adverse to inexpensive immune and nutritional methods that can make huge differences in surgical recovery and complications.
No it isn't. I don't know any self respecting doctor who wouldn't recommend a healthy diet. By healthy diet I mean the basics: avoid too much sugar, fat, salt, eat the right amount of calories, etc... They also routinely recommend avoiding or favoring some kinds of foods if you have some conditions. As for inexpensive immune methods, they are called vaccines.
The recent "discovery" that vitamin B1+hydrocortisone+a little injected vitamin C can prevent and abort sepsis is a small, belated step in the right direction. Big Medicine is still way behind on injectable vitamin C technology though.
The conclusion of that "recent discovery" is "additional studies are required to confirm these preliminary findings". Many promising preliminary studies don't pass clinical trials unfortunately. Don't claim victory too early. Vitamin C is effective for treating scurvy, which is a now rare disease caused by the lack of vitamin C. It is a discovery that saved thousands of life in the past. But such a resounding success doesn't make vitamin C a cure-all. Other uses of vitamin C, injectable or otherwise didn't get much conclusive results despite being studied a lot (61759 results for "vitamin C" on PubMed).
the melting of the ice of Greenland and Antarctica is not fully taken into account in modern climate models
Emphasis mine. Of course they took Antarctica and Greenland into account. And even that is an extreme simplification of what's actually discussed in the paper. My understanding is: - Looking at what happened in the past eras, they noticed a rapid raise in sea level following the melting of polar ice - Current day observation and historical data don't match, sea levels should rise faster than what is currently happening - Using the marine ice cliff instability hypothesis, a catastrophic event, they managed to match the historical data - It turns out that the marine ice cliff instability hypothesis doesn't match current observations, and therefore, a catastrophe is unlikely - The new suggested explantation is that Greenland and Antarctica ice melting will accelerate because of something else (trapped warm water according to TFS)
It is the opposite: either the experiment/observation works or it doesn't. If the result doesn't matches what physics has predicted, the physics needs to be changed.
I think the most educated belief is that the Wardenclyffe tower wouldn't have worked, that Tesla's ideas weren't completely crackpot but he was off by several orders of magnitude. But the experiment never happened so we can't know for sure, there is still an tiny chance that it would have worked and that our physics are wrong. Don't count on it though, we know much more now that during Tesla's time and we have pretty solid evidence against his ideas.
And of course, the idea that the speed limit is simply too low is never even considered.
One thing I don't understand about the US is that almost everyone drives 5-10mph over the speed limit, no more, no less. I mean, if you care, why not drive at the speed written on the sign? It the tip culture so well established that you also need to tip speed limits? The worst part is that I'm sure that if someone decided to actually set the speed limit to the actual speed people drive, people will just drive faster, so road planners most likely take that into account when setting speed limits. That's a vicious circle.
You can and should expect a kid that age to understand there are consequences to his/her actions.
13 is well under the age of majority. It means the law itself doesn't expect that kid to understand the consequences of his actions. Not stepping in front of traffic and not lighting gas fires in libraries are things that are taught early, because it is simple (traffic=dangerous, fire=dangerous) and it is important for survival. And still, we usually don't let 13 year olds alone in libraries. But walking the fine line between what is an acceptable joke and what *some* adults interpret as a "public terrorist threat" requires a level of maturity that we can't really expect a 13 year old to have. I'm quite sure (I hope) the vast majority of adults correctly interpreted the video as a joke, police made sure the kid isn't a threat, just to be on the safe side, he isn't. Give that kid an assignment and we are done.
Funny how researchers never consider things like that.
Researchers cannot consider everything. But they know about statistics. And they will notice one person with a score completely off the chart, and will either discard it, or try to find out why that guy is different. And it includes checking for things like fraud and other external factors. In some cases they call in stage magicians, who are experts at these kinds of things.
Never tell you? They are actually quite transparent about that. By going to the Google ads website you can see about how much ads cost, Google's share, have a vague idea about how targeting works. Same thing for YouTube videos, Play Store purchases, etc... You can see the details of the data they collect about you (location, search history,...). They are also a public company and you can easily find the financials.
They are really secretive about the technical details but they don't try to hide how they make money off you.
As it is commonly pointed out on Slashdot, fingerprints are usernames, not passwords. So what if an amusement park uses them? They are less privacy invading than a simple picture, and very convenient. The ones who should be sued are not companies who collect them but the ones who use them for reasons others than checking your physical presence. The way Six Flags uses them is exactly how they are meant to be used. Of course, they are still personal data but why focus specifically on fingerprints when they are not too different from your full name or birth date.
Slashdot Mirror
Xerox made copy machines, they still make copy machines, and they seem be be doing well enough.
Would the situation have been different if they didn't make Xerox PARC?
A blunder would imply they did something particularly stupid. They didn't. They invested some of their excess money in researching promising technology, millions of things could have gone wrong, turned out it was marketing, well, too bad, but it is not like Xerox completely disappeared. From the point of view of Xerox, it was certainly a failed experiment, but that's a controlled failure, hardly a blunder.
It is like calling the Apple Newton a blunder because the Palm Pilot took most of its success. Yes, it was a failure, but it didn't prevent them from turning it into the resounding success that was the iPhone 20 years later.
I don't know, just about every DJs I have seen (in person and in pictures) have a MacBook proudly exposed on stage. Some use no computer at all, but I've yet to see a professional DJ with a Windows PC.
They may be using Windows PCs behind the scenes but the Apple logo is still shown to millions of spectators.
Because people don't realize something changed unless the appearance changed.
I think I've read that in an interview of someone from Microsoft. He gave the Windows calculator as an example: when they started using rational numbers internally in order to avoid rounding errors, no one noticed, because the UI stayed the same.
I have a personal example of the opposite. We maintain an issue at work (a modified version of Mantis). Our last update was a massive improvement according to users. In fact, the only thing that changed significantly was the style, by that I mean colors and shapes, nothing functional.
I found the "fuck gesture" to be a very clear way of interacting with people.
For example, if you meet some UI designers from Google, it can be used to show how much you appreciate their work.
A new upload service. Unlimited, write-only storage.
Part of a sysadmin job is to fix the mess of others, get lied to and deal with incompetents.
Sometimes, you'll have to fix a problem, and no one will be there to help you. You are the expert, you are supposed to fix problems, not the other way around. When asked, people will invariably tell you they did nothing. If there is some problem you can't fix (ex: that "read only" attribute), you'll probably have to tell the person who can fix it exactly what to do. Either because that person doesn't know (remember, you are the expert), or because he is some kind of higher up who specifically hired you not to waste his time.
Any Unicode string should be accepted as a password. It includes emoji and any piece of weirdness Unicode has to offer.
The only thing is that the string should be normalized first, this is because there are cases where the same character can have different representations: for example, é can be represented both as a single code point or something like e combined with '.
Drugs are patented for 20 years, it means that in the ideal case where your competitor didn't find something better your "recurring revenue" is going to be severely cut down by cheap generics after your patent expire.
If you develop a cure however, you are going to completely destroy your competition, and get a good backlog of already ill patients to treat. Sure, it won't last, but neither will your patent. So the ones who aren't getting rich are the ones who make generics, you get to keep all the profits.
When researchers compiled a huge database of the digital habits of teams at Microsoft, they found that the clearest warning sign of an ineffective manager was being slow to answer emails.
A manager manages. They are the interface between the working team and the rest of the world, they have to process email, it's their job. The manager is here so that the other members of the team don't have to respond to outside communication and focus on their own job instead.
Are you joking? There are a lot of bad actors who are much worse than Google and Facebook. A significant part of them aren't even aware of how bad they are.
Facebook and Google are huge targets. They are under high scrutiny because everything they do have a million times more impact than the same thing done in mom's and pop's website.
I've seen so many appalling things being done simply because of incompetence: password recovery methods sending you your plain text password, mailing list using the "cc" field, exposing hundreds of addresses, a real estate agency exposing all their customer data in a windows network share on an open WiFi network, ... Some small companies that simply never heard about protection of personal data. These are all small scale but as a whole, they probably end up doing more damage than Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft combined.
Ending that kind small scale of abuse is a large part of GDPR btw. Things like the Data Protection Officer requirement (who doesn't have to be a new hire) is just a way to tell companies, big or small, to actually care.
TFA "Since the data is kept in memory in the browser process, a malicious website could try to exhaust the memory of the browser process and make it more likely to crash"
Google is the best at algorithms, how could they miss checking such an obvious trait and ensure the FS does not go over x MB?
They didn't miss it, quite the opposite, it is a potential problem they identified for a solution that isn't out yet.
As for limiting to x MB, it is exactly what they intend to do, but while it is an obvious solution, finding the value of x isn't.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It seems that a spoonful of RoundUp wouldn't be so bad but a few of them (>85mL) could be fatal. The surfactant POEA makes it more toxic than just glyphosate.
So yeah, you could take the dare, that would be stupid but not enough to earn you a Darwin award.
Electron is an excellent choice.
The recommended specs for Windows 95 are a 486 CPU, 8MB of RAM. Thanks to Electron, we can get close to that level of performance with our modern high end PCs.
Medicine remains seriously adverse to inexpensive immune and nutritional methods that can make huge differences in surgical recovery and complications.
No it isn't. I don't know any self respecting doctor who wouldn't recommend a healthy diet. By healthy diet I mean the basics: avoid too much sugar, fat, salt, eat the right amount of calories, etc... They also routinely recommend avoiding or favoring some kinds of foods if you have some conditions. As for inexpensive immune methods, they are called vaccines.
The recent "discovery" that vitamin B1+hydrocortisone+a little injected vitamin C can prevent and abort sepsis is a small, belated step in the right direction. Big Medicine is still way behind on injectable vitamin C technology though.
The conclusion of that "recent discovery" is "additional studies are required to confirm these preliminary findings". Many promising preliminary studies don't pass clinical trials unfortunately. Don't claim victory too early.
Vitamin C is effective for treating scurvy, which is a now rare disease caused by the lack of vitamin C. It is a discovery that saved thousands of life in the past. But such a resounding success doesn't make vitamin C a cure-all. Other uses of vitamin C, injectable or otherwise didn't get much conclusive results despite being studied a lot (61759 results for "vitamin C" on PubMed).
the melting of the ice of Greenland and Antarctica is not fully taken into account in modern climate models
Emphasis mine. Of course they took Antarctica and Greenland into account. And even that is an extreme simplification of what's actually discussed in the paper.
My understanding is:
- Looking at what happened in the past eras, they noticed a rapid raise in sea level following the melting of polar ice
- Current day observation and historical data don't match, sea levels should rise faster than what is currently happening
- Using the marine ice cliff instability hypothesis, a catastrophic event, they managed to match the historical data
- It turns out that the marine ice cliff instability hypothesis doesn't match current observations, and therefore, a catastrophe is unlikely
- The new suggested explantation is that Greenland and Antarctica ice melting will accelerate because of something else (trapped warm water according to TFS)
It is the opposite: either the experiment/observation works or it doesn't. If the result doesn't matches what physics has predicted, the physics needs to be changed.
I think the most educated belief is that the Wardenclyffe tower wouldn't have worked, that Tesla's ideas weren't completely crackpot but he was off by several orders of magnitude. But the experiment never happened so we can't know for sure, there is still an tiny chance that it would have worked and that our physics are wrong. Don't count on it though, we know much more now that during Tesla's time and we have pretty solid evidence against his ideas.
It is not even a law, it is a EU directive.
It means that it needs to be adapted to every member state law before becoming effective.
So that's two levels of interpretation: first to turn the directive into a law, then to turn the law into judgment.
And of course, the idea that the speed limit is simply too low is never even considered.
One thing I don't understand about the US is that almost everyone drives 5-10mph over the speed limit, no more, no less. I mean, if you care, why not drive at the speed written on the sign? It the tip culture so well established that you also need to tip speed limits?
The worst part is that I'm sure that if someone decided to actually set the speed limit to the actual speed people drive, people will just drive faster, so road planners most likely take that into account when setting speed limits. That's a vicious circle.
You can and should expect a kid that age to understand there are consequences to his/her actions.
13 is well under the age of majority. It means the law itself doesn't expect that kid to understand the consequences of his actions.
Not stepping in front of traffic and not lighting gas fires in libraries are things that are taught early, because it is simple (traffic=dangerous, fire=dangerous) and it is important for survival. And still, we usually don't let 13 year olds alone in libraries.
But walking the fine line between what is an acceptable joke and what *some* adults interpret as a "public terrorist threat" requires a level of maturity that we can't really expect a 13 year old to have. I'm quite sure (I hope) the vast majority of adults correctly interpreted the video as a joke, police made sure the kid isn't a threat, just to be on the safe side, he isn't. Give that kid an assignment and we are done.
Funny how researchers never consider things like that.
Researchers cannot consider everything.
But they know about statistics. And they will notice one person with a score completely off the chart, and will either discard it, or try to find out why that guy is different. And it includes checking for things like fraud and other external factors.
In some cases they call in stage magicians, who are experts at these kinds of things.
In fact Mozilla is Mosaic killer. That's where the name comes from.
I don't believe in this motherfucking 'robot revolution'.
More like a fatherfucking robot revolution according to the article.
Never tell you? They are actually quite transparent about that.
By going to the Google ads website you can see about how much ads cost, Google's share, have a vague idea about how targeting works. Same thing for YouTube videos, Play Store purchases, etc... You can see the details of the data they collect about you (location, search history,...). They are also a public company and you can easily find the financials.
They are really secretive about the technical details but they don't try to hide how they make money off you.
So, the major telecom operators are "big cable" now.
I am waiting for the days we'll call the leaders of the democratic party "big ass".
As it is commonly pointed out on Slashdot, fingerprints are usernames, not passwords.
So what if an amusement park uses them? They are less privacy invading than a simple picture, and very convenient.
The ones who should be sued are not companies who collect them but the ones who use them for reasons others than checking your physical presence. The way Six Flags uses them is exactly how they are meant to be used.
Of course, they are still personal data but why focus specifically on fingerprints when they are not too different from your full name or birth date.