Stretch is an interesting concern. As long as it's relatively uniform (so the disk remains nearly circular), you could probably cope with fairly large size changes by encoding tracking information either as additional data or in the modulation scheme. You've already got to deal with the varying linear velocity as you slew in and out, in addition to variability in the motor's spin rate. It'd be similar to dealing with Doppler in radio communications, albeit on a somewhat faster time scale. Since the data rate is also much higher, there'd be more bandwidth for tracking data, so I suspect that you could just run similar methods faster.
No, but as they mention in their explanation, the foreseeable future of this is additional lawsuits striking at their other markets. Rather than run into the ground, they're doing the responsible thing and closing up while they still have the resources to refund/service their customers. Nice to see a company being responsible in this regard.
Re:Al's greatest work
on
An Ode To Al
·
· Score: 1
Glad you're modded up, thanks for the link. That's the funniest song (+ video) I've heard in a really long time...
Well, I think they do some sort of encryption against hardware in the dongle -- it's more than just an ID in a USB key, at least on some of them. Of course, all these things are susceptible to hacking the binary that does the key checking to ignore the result since, at some point, there's a "yes/no" decision to be made that can be faked.
That is, unless they do something really crafty like putting non-trivial program logic in the compiler in such a way that you really can't run without it. However, since most of these programs (that I've seen -- high end modeling software) really authenticate against a FlexLM server that manages the dongle, I think the native software is just querying the server and the yes/no binary hack would work.
I don't think the dongle is usually there to prevent copying of the software so much as to allow the vendor to restrict access to features without having to distribute multiple versions of the software. This way they can enable or disable features and charge more or less accordingly. If the user needs the extra features, a change to the license file is all that's needed once the payment clears.
Plus, a gaming market that for 25 years had not cared about backwards compatibility, suddenly wanted to play their 5 year old games again. Whether this was a true shift in the gaming demographic, or just more marketing hype, I leave as an exercise for the reader:)
It was a big attraction for me. I did not have a PS so the option to buy a PS2 and get access to PS games was very attractive. I already had a Dreamcast, so this way I could get one more device and cover many years worth of games with one more purchase.
It's a VERY rare thing that an applicant actually has a legitimate reason to fill 10 pages of a resume, excepting cases where an employer specifically asks for a detailed job history. A couple pages is more than enough space to give general information about skills and objectives and give some detail for the most recent / relevant jobs. A resume is not a life story, it's a sales pitch. Submitting a 10 page tome indicates either unfamiliarity with the purpose of a resume (really, if you've GOT 10 pages worth of jobs, you should be past this point) or an inability to edit ones work to a specific target.
If I were hiring, I probably wouldn't outright disregard a resume based on its length, but it's sure not going to be an advantage. If the first page doesn't look VERY promising, it's going to go in the trash, especially if I've got other promising applicants who do a more concise job presenting themselves.
Fitting it all onto less pages by taking out all the white space and using a smaller font is cheating, and has a side affect of makeing your CV harder to read. If your CV is hard to read - there is a risk that people won't, most hiring managers will be faced by a pile of CVs you want yours to be the one that stands out, being well presented and easy to read is at least as important as the skills on the CV.
This bears repeating. One of the worst resumes I've ever seen was from a guy who might well have been fairly good. He had a lot of experience, certainly. I never found out either because we didn't actually interview him or because I left the company before we did, I don't recall which.
Anyway, his resume looked as though he maintained it as a text file and after each job or project, he just added a paragraph to the top of the file. He'd been doing this for probably 20 years, so he had about 4 pages of it, all printed in 10 point font (might have been monospace, don't recall). There were no breaks or other formatting other than a newline at the end of each paragraph - not a blank line between them, mind you, just a newline short of the page margin if the paragraph didn't stretch all the way across the page. He might have used blanks between sections, I don't recall. Headings were in the same font as everything else.
I actually spent a few minutes trying to read it and I seriously couldn't. The (lack of) formatting was so awful that the solid wall of text made it impossible to concentrate on the words.
Don't do this. Format cleanly, and keep it concise. Your resume is worthless if no one reads it.
True, though I know plenty of people (myself included) who thought they sucked, knew in advance they would suck (especially after the first two), but went anyway. Why? Because they'd been waiting almost 20 years to see the rest of the series. It was just something they had to do. Actually, I didn't think the first one was *that* bad, but I very nearly abandoned the whole thing after the second. (I wish I had).
Anyway, I don't have any interest in anything else that George Lucas would do. If he wants me to go see something else he does, it will have to sell itself on its merits. If he puts out a shit movie that isn't a Star Wars, people just won't be interested. They want to see Darth Vader and Obi-Wan Kenobi, not George Lucas.
I don't think this study was a pinnacle of scientific excellence in research by any means, but all they're reporting is a correlation that suggests a possible causative effect. They aren't trying to explain why at this point, merely point out that they've found a correlation. While it's perfectly sensible to ask why to believe there is a causative relation, it's not a proper critique of this study.
Plus, I think there's a perfectly clear "excuse," even if the correlation really does indicate causation. There are outliers to any group like that in the study. I'm willing to bet that the population of kids who do their homework and studying like you describe is so negligible that they could spend 10 hours per school day playing video games and not affect the statistics.
You forget... the carrots have a consciousness! For tomorrow is the harvest day, and to them, it is the holocaust! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Can I get an amen? Can I get a hallelujah?
CMB physics is a powerful probe into the origins of the universe. That it is consistent with our big bang / inflation models is a powerful fact, independent of any spin the politicos might try to put on it. The measurement of anisotropies, first in temperature (what COBE found) and more recently in polarization are our best probes of the conditions in the early times. So far, it's all very consistent with the big bang model and extremely hard to explain otherwise.
Anyway, there's a lot more to say about why CMB is important, but that doesn't really address your question. First, there is a lot of interest in CMB research at the moment largely due to its power as a cosmological probe, so it's clear that the COBE work was groundbreaking in a burgeoning field. The Nobel committee doesn't like to reward work that turns out to have been a false start, so they often wait a few years (in this case about 14) to see that the breakthrough is corroborated and remains important. That has definitely happened.
Also, it's hard to give a prize in astronomy without touching the big bang model, so I don't think it's fair to read anything in to that. Among working cosmologists, the idea of inflation and the big bang is so central that it's now essentially assumed as fact. There just isn't a realistic useful model that doesn't involve inflation. Thus, although CMB research does happen to be tied pretty intrinsically to the big bang model, the fact that it involves the big bang model at all only says that it's related to cosmology.
So, no, I don't think there's any nose-rubbing at all, except to the extent that presenting cold facts about observations and a successful scientific theory makes certain dogmas look pretty ridiculous.
It's quite a bit different in that knowing the geometry of our planet is immediately useful to those who would navigate around it. As far as we know, it is physically impossible to travel far enough to need to worry about most of the things that we learn from astronomy (on any time scale relevant, and ignoring solar system astronomy). Most of the research is pretty strictly academic -- it's interesting, but not useful.
Personally, I think it's valuable (I'm a physics grad student working in CMB astronomy, so that's not a totally idle statement). However, I don't have a good concrete answer as to why for those who don't like knowledge for its own sake. The best I can say is that there's been a long, long history of valuable knowledge coming out of unexpected places.
We know a lot about the laws of physics, but we don't know everything there is to know. Are we at the point where we know everything that's relevant? Not even close. Where will the next breakthrough come from? High energy phyics? Mesoscopic condensed matter? CMB cosmology? No one knows. If we knew what the breakthrough would be well enough to target it in our search, then we'd already be there. It'll be a surprise and the only way to get there is to carry out research in every remotely promising area.
Anyway, I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I do think the case for astronomy research is a bit more subtle.
This is a very wise comment. If your goal is specifically to make a lot of money, there are better ways than by starting a company.
If you're doing something you like, the company need only be large enough to pay the bills. If it grows bigger than that, great, but as long as it's paying the bills and you're happy, then you're good. Even if it never takes off, a lot of people do very well with small local businesses.
Of course, if it DOES take off, you may find that you start hating the work, even if you love the product. Building a large company is its own job, quite distinct from most of the business of the company. I've not done it myself, but I worked at a tiny company that grew and it was clear that the founders had to do a lot of work they weren't excited about in order to build a company that they were excited about. So if you really want to enjoy your work, it may even be better for you NOT to hit it big.
No protection AFAIK, but in principle, you can't infringe on anyone's patent unless they had the patent before you invented it independently. Of course, in practice it may not be easy to assert your right to use it should a patent be (incorrectly) issued afterwards. It will be up to you to demonstrate that the patent office shouldn't have issued it when you're sued. IANAL, but I believe there is a fairly strong (and ridiculous) presumption that the patent office did its homework, so you will have a difficult job.
The government IS the people who are employed by it, not just those who make the laws. Anyone acting with more legal authority than an ordinary citizen carries the responsibility to understand this and behave accordingly. In particular, they have limited powers and must respect those.
The government, through one of its agents, detained this person. Unless there was some other unreported reason for the detention, it was not lawful. The agent, assuming he was acting outside his authority, needs to be punished. If he was acting with the knowledge and consent of others in the organization, the punishment needs to extend upwards.
The government is responsible for the actions of all its agents. If they misbehave, they need to be slapped down firmly. This is not really any different than an employee at a private company, although the stakes are higher.
First, I'm extremely polite to nearly everyone I interact with almost 100% of the time, and I have encountered PLENTY of rude cops, TSA, and customs agents.
Second, are you seriously suggesting that we shouldn't worry when our government detains an individual who has not only committed no crime, but has shown no evidence whatsoever of having committed any crime?
We have an absolute constitutional right to peacefully express any opinion we like, whether or not it is productive or mature to do so. This was an egregious violation of that right and that is not something that can be tolerated.
I know what you are saying, and I tend to agree. No one likes to have the coldly rational discussions of how much can be spent (in terms of dollars, time, resources, etc) to save a particular life, because we wish it could be infinite. It can't, though, and at some point you just have to do the best that you can.
So, I suppose if you really can't afford the proper solution, you are better off with a hack than nothing. Still, I'd cut a lot of other corners in my quality of life before I started trying to scrimp on critical health care. Of course, it's hard to know much about the situation from the blurb.
I'm a pretty technical person and I was confused for some time before I realized that podcasts did not derive from Apple, other than through the ubiquity of their MP3 player. This is exactly the sort of confusion that trademark law is designed to prevent.
I'd argue that the confusion is there, but that Apple missed the boat on protecting against "podcast" as a generic term. However, other use of the "pod" token might still be protectable and I've got a lot more sympathy if they are just trying to avoid a flood of "[x]Pod[y]" companies.
While it may be an improvement over the current circumstance, I'd still argue it's irresponsible. Frankly, if this person could be at risk of dying due to care being an hour or two late, I find it hard to believe they are safe at home without outside care being arranged. An hour or two can be as simple as an alarm failing to go off and a perfectly healthy caregiver oversleeping.
Your point about fail-safe engineering is correct. One thing to watch, though, is the "Crying Wolf" effect. If there are too many false positives, a warning tends to become less effective. Either the system needs to have few of these, or the people responding need to be motivated to respond EVERY time, even if the last 10 responses were to false alarms.
Based on the information we're given, I think the only compassionate answer is "don't do this yourself." If a person's life depends on the reliability of this solution, trying to come up with a clever hack is just plain irresponsible. In that case, you really need to buy a tested off-the-shelf solution.
Slashdot Mirror
Stretch is an interesting concern. As long as it's relatively uniform (so the disk remains nearly circular), you could probably cope with fairly large size changes by encoding tracking information either as additional data or in the modulation scheme. You've already got to deal with the varying linear velocity as you slew in and out, in addition to variability in the motor's spin rate. It'd be similar to dealing with Doppler in radio communications, albeit on a somewhat faster time scale. Since the data rate is also much higher, there'd be more bandwidth for tracking data, so I suspect that you could just run similar methods faster.
No, but as they mention in their explanation, the foreseeable future of this is additional lawsuits striking at their other markets. Rather than run into the ground, they're doing the responsible thing and closing up while they still have the resources to refund/service their customers. Nice to see a company being responsible in this regard.
Glad you're modded up, thanks for the link. That's the funniest song (+ video) I've heard in a really long time...
Well, I think they do some sort of encryption against hardware in the dongle -- it's more than just an ID in a USB key, at least on some of them. Of course, all these things are susceptible to hacking the binary that does the key checking to ignore the result since, at some point, there's a "yes/no" decision to be made that can be faked.
That is, unless they do something really crafty like putting non-trivial program logic in the compiler in such a way that you really can't run without it. However, since most of these programs (that I've seen -- high end modeling software) really authenticate against a FlexLM server that manages the dongle, I think the native software is just querying the server and the yes/no binary hack would work.
I don't think the dongle is usually there to prevent copying of the software so much as to allow the vendor to restrict access to features without having to distribute multiple versions of the software. This way they can enable or disable features and charge more or less accordingly. If the user needs the extra features, a change to the license file is all that's needed once the payment clears.
It was a big attraction for me. I did not have a PS so the option to buy a PS2 and get access to PS games was very attractive. I already had a Dreamcast, so this way I could get one more device and cover many years worth of games with one more purchase.
Commie!!
It's a VERY rare thing that an applicant actually has a legitimate reason to fill 10 pages of a resume, excepting cases where an employer specifically asks for a detailed job history. A couple pages is more than enough space to give general information about skills and objectives and give some detail for the most recent / relevant jobs. A resume is not a life story, it's a sales pitch. Submitting a 10 page tome indicates either unfamiliarity with the purpose of a resume (really, if you've GOT 10 pages worth of jobs, you should be past this point) or an inability to edit ones work to a specific target.
If I were hiring, I probably wouldn't outright disregard a resume based on its length, but it's sure not going to be an advantage. If the first page doesn't look VERY promising, it's going to go in the trash, especially if I've got other promising applicants who do a more concise job presenting themselves.
This bears repeating. One of the worst resumes I've ever seen was from a guy who might well have been fairly good. He had a lot of experience, certainly. I never found out either because we didn't actually interview him or because I left the company before we did, I don't recall which.
Anyway, his resume looked as though he maintained it as a text file and after each job or project, he just added a paragraph to the top of the file. He'd been doing this for probably 20 years, so he had about 4 pages of it, all printed in 10 point font (might have been monospace, don't recall). There were no breaks or other formatting other than a newline at the end of each paragraph - not a blank line between them, mind you, just a newline short of the page margin if the paragraph didn't stretch all the way across the page. He might have used blanks between sections, I don't recall. Headings were in the same font as everything else.
I actually spent a few minutes trying to read it and I seriously couldn't. The (lack of) formatting was so awful that the solid wall of text made it impossible to concentrate on the words.
Don't do this. Format cleanly, and keep it concise. Your resume is worthless if no one reads it.
Shouldn't it be "Kappy Kirthday toK youK" ?
True, though I know plenty of people (myself included) who thought they sucked, knew in advance they would suck (especially after the first two), but went anyway. Why? Because they'd been waiting almost 20 years to see the rest of the series. It was just something they had to do. Actually, I didn't think the first one was *that* bad, but I very nearly abandoned the whole thing after the second. (I wish I had).
Anyway, I don't have any interest in anything else that George Lucas would do. If he wants me to go see something else he does, it will have to sell itself on its merits. If he puts out a shit movie that isn't a Star Wars, people just won't be interested. They want to see Darth Vader and Obi-Wan Kenobi, not George Lucas.
I don't think this study was a pinnacle of scientific excellence in research by any means, but all they're reporting is a correlation that suggests a possible causative effect. They aren't trying to explain why at this point, merely point out that they've found a correlation. While it's perfectly sensible to ask why to believe there is a causative relation, it's not a proper critique of this study.
Plus, I think there's a perfectly clear "excuse," even if the correlation really does indicate causation. There are outliers to any group like that in the study. I'm willing to bet that the population of kids who do their homework and studying like you describe is so negligible that they could spend 10 hours per school day playing video games and not affect the statistics.
You forget... the carrots have a consciousness! For tomorrow is the harvest day, and to them, it is the holocaust! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Can I get an amen? Can I get a hallelujah?
Ok, sorry, I thought you were being glib.
CMB physics is a powerful probe into the origins of the universe. That it is consistent with our big bang / inflation models is a powerful fact, independent of any spin the politicos might try to put on it. The measurement of anisotropies, first in temperature (what COBE found) and more recently in polarization are our best probes of the conditions in the early times. So far, it's all very consistent with the big bang model and extremely hard to explain otherwise.
Anyway, there's a lot more to say about why CMB is important, but that doesn't really address your question. First, there is a lot of interest in CMB research at the moment largely due to its power as a cosmological probe, so it's clear that the COBE work was groundbreaking in a burgeoning field. The Nobel committee doesn't like to reward work that turns out to have been a false start, so they often wait a few years (in this case about 14) to see that the breakthrough is corroborated and remains important. That has definitely happened.
Also, it's hard to give a prize in astronomy without touching the big bang model, so I don't think it's fair to read anything in to that. Among working cosmologists, the idea of inflation and the big bang is so central that it's now essentially assumed as fact. There just isn't a realistic useful model that doesn't involve inflation. Thus, although CMB research does happen to be tied pretty intrinsically to the big bang model, the fact that it involves the big bang model at all only says that it's related to cosmology.
So, no, I don't think there's any nose-rubbing at all, except to the extent that presenting cold facts about observations and a successful scientific theory makes certain dogmas look pretty ridiculous.
It's quite a bit different in that knowing the geometry of our planet is immediately useful to those who would navigate around it. As far as we know, it is physically impossible to travel far enough to need to worry about most of the things that we learn from astronomy (on any time scale relevant, and ignoring solar system astronomy). Most of the research is pretty strictly academic -- it's interesting, but not useful.
Personally, I think it's valuable (I'm a physics grad student working in CMB astronomy, so that's not a totally idle statement). However, I don't have a good concrete answer as to why for those who don't like knowledge for its own sake. The best I can say is that there's been a long, long history of valuable knowledge coming out of unexpected places.
We know a lot about the laws of physics, but we don't know everything there is to know. Are we at the point where we know everything that's relevant? Not even close. Where will the next breakthrough come from? High energy phyics? Mesoscopic condensed matter? CMB cosmology? No one knows. If we knew what the breakthrough would be well enough to target it in our search, then we'd already be there. It'll be a surprise and the only way to get there is to carry out research in every remotely promising area.
Anyway, I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I do think the case for astronomy research is a bit more subtle.
No.
This is a very wise comment. If your goal is specifically to make a lot of money, there are better ways than by starting a company.
If you're doing something you like, the company need only be large enough to pay the bills. If it grows bigger than that, great, but as long as it's paying the bills and you're happy, then you're good. Even if it never takes off, a lot of people do very well with small local businesses.
Of course, if it DOES take off, you may find that you start hating the work, even if you love the product. Building a large company is its own job, quite distinct from most of the business of the company. I've not done it myself, but I worked at a tiny company that grew and it was clear that the founders had to do a lot of work they weren't excited about in order to build a company that they were excited about. So if you really want to enjoy your work, it may even be better for you NOT to hit it big.
No protection AFAIK, but in principle, you can't infringe on anyone's patent unless they had the patent before you invented it independently. Of course, in practice it may not be easy to assert your right to use it should a patent be (incorrectly) issued afterwards. It will be up to you to demonstrate that the patent office shouldn't have issued it when you're sued. IANAL, but I believe there is a fairly strong (and ridiculous) presumption that the patent office did its homework, so you will have a difficult job.
No, if he were 18 and on his own, then there would be no question that he was responsible for his own actions.
The government IS the people who are employed by it, not just those who make the laws. Anyone acting with more legal authority than an ordinary citizen carries the responsibility to understand this and behave accordingly. In particular, they have limited powers and must respect those.
The government, through one of its agents, detained this person. Unless there was some other unreported reason for the detention, it was not lawful. The agent, assuming he was acting outside his authority, needs to be punished. If he was acting with the knowledge and consent of others in the organization, the punishment needs to extend upwards.
The government is responsible for the actions of all its agents. If they misbehave, they need to be slapped down firmly. This is not really any different than an employee at a private company, although the stakes are higher.
First, I'm extremely polite to nearly everyone I interact with almost 100% of the time, and I have encountered PLENTY of rude cops, TSA, and customs agents.
Second, are you seriously suggesting that we shouldn't worry when our government detains an individual who has not only committed no crime, but has shown no evidence whatsoever of having committed any crime?
We have an absolute constitutional right to peacefully express any opinion we like, whether or not it is productive or mature to do so. This was an egregious violation of that right and that is not something that can be tolerated.
I know what you are saying, and I tend to agree. No one likes to have the coldly rational discussions of how much can be spent (in terms of dollars, time, resources, etc) to save a particular life, because we wish it could be infinite. It can't, though, and at some point you just have to do the best that you can.
So, I suppose if you really can't afford the proper solution, you are better off with a hack than nothing. Still, I'd cut a lot of other corners in my quality of life before I started trying to scrimp on critical health care. Of course, it's hard to know much about the situation from the blurb.
I'm a pretty technical person and I was confused for some time before I realized that podcasts did not derive from Apple, other than through the ubiquity of their MP3 player. This is exactly the sort of confusion that trademark law is designed to prevent.
I'd argue that the confusion is there, but that Apple missed the boat on protecting against "podcast" as a generic term. However, other use of the "pod" token might still be protectable and I've got a lot more sympathy if they are just trying to avoid a flood of "[x]Pod[y]" companies.
While it may be an improvement over the current circumstance, I'd still argue it's irresponsible. Frankly, if this person could be at risk of dying due to care being an hour or two late, I find it hard to believe they are safe at home without outside care being arranged. An hour or two can be as simple as an alarm failing to go off and a perfectly healthy caregiver oversleeping.
Your point about fail-safe engineering is correct. One thing to watch, though, is the "Crying Wolf" effect. If there are too many false positives, a warning tends to become less effective. Either the system needs to have few of these, or the people responding need to be motivated to respond EVERY time, even if the last 10 responses were to false alarms.
Based on the information we're given, I think the only compassionate answer is "don't do this yourself." If a person's life depends on the reliability of this solution, trying to come up with a clever hack is just plain irresponsible. In that case, you really need to buy a tested off-the-shelf solution.