> It's like the actual movie starts 20 minutes after the movie start time.
At my theater, the movie starts twelve minutes after the published time. I show ten minutes after the published time, two minutes before the movie. This is helpful to know when you look at the listings and there is a showing that is "about to start" and it looks like you can;t get there on time.
I've moved away from the partisan fan club and now see things from a more objective viewpoint than I used to. I can see bad things about both trump and Clinton, and good things about both.
The political establishment was #nevertrump. He's not being politically correct, he's not doing and saying the things that the RNC and the party leaders would have him say and do. His proposals are very different from what we've seen mainstream winning candidates propose. I think he, like Rand Paul, would be different. Some good different, some bad different. Hard to know the net effect.
Clinton has been involved in politics since 1977. The head of the Democratic party was Clinton's employee a few years ago. A year ago, the DNC assumed she'd be the nominee. Clinton is as much "politics as usual" as you can possibly get.
So that's a difference between them. Clinton is very much Washington, she's the DNC incarnate. She says whatever the Democrat pollsters determine is best to say that day. Trump is Trump, and he says what he thinks; he doesn't care what the Republican party thinks.
> The person that invented pop-up ads should have been imprisoned and tortured for life for the trillion headaches it has plagued society with.
I happened to be around at that time. I knew the people who were likely the first to use popups, within the first few sites anyway. I think the first person who used popups probably wouldn't have, had they known where it would end up. Not that it would have mattered, Xpics and certain other companies would have gotten the ball rolling.
Some people make it a point to arrive at a movie theater early enough to see the "previews" aka ads . TV has multiple commercial breaks in the middle of the show. On my web sites, "related links" come at the end, after you're done with the content. These are very different in terms of how much I value avoiding them. I'd pay a much higher price spread to avoid ads interrupting a show than ads at the end, which I can so easily ignore.
Netflix also the menu and guide screens. A banner ad there is much less objectionable than a video preroll. Also better than a preroll is one-second audio like "Welcome to Mythbusters, brought to you by Shapeways."
I couldn't begin to put a price on avoiding ads until you tell me what kind of ad you're talking about.
Ps - yet another variable is what is advertised. If Mythbusters had ads for for other similar shows and for hobbyist 3D printers, that would be less objectionable than ads for Enzyte Male Enhancement, because I might actually be INTERESTED in 20 seconds of information about a new hobby-grade 3D printer.
Yeah it's limiting. One popular use is for high value real estate. That will be allowed, if for example you're selling a home with land, or any retail/ office real estate with a parking lot. Block the driveways some time when the business is closed and you're good to go.
I shoot fireworks shows. Fireworks shows have been popular with drone operators. In fact, there is a real nice professional looking drone video of one of my shows on Youtube. It just so happens that when we launch explosives into the air, we make sure there is nobody underneath, so drones can be used to video fireworks shows.
I'm sure there are many more examples. What is not clear is how they'll treat flight over areas where it's UNLIKELY that you'll fly over any people, such as some lakes and rivers, mountainous areas, etc. I suppose the operator can watch to be sure they don't fly DIRECTLY over any boats. Based on how the FAA handles ultralight aircraft, I think they'll be reasonable. Flying over any rural area will probably be generally okay of you're otherwise being safe; even though there is a small chance that a farmer on a tractor could drive under your flight path.
All of US military history is the big ol army repeatedly losing to a bunch of rebels with rifles, and even smoothbore muskets. For fifteen years the US military has been in Afghanistan fighting rebels with rifles and pickup trucks. (yes, they declared "victory" and evacuated most US troops a few years ago, but they are still fighting there too.) See also the USSR experience in the same location. The US began when the most powerful military in the world was defeated by a silversmith, a printer, and their drinking buddies. Between then we've had Vietnam (the US military can EASILY defeat a bunch of poor people in 12 foot fishing boats, right?) and several others.
These are all examples where the entire US military was united, the whole US military vs foreign rebels.How many US servicemen and women would fire on their own families, do you think? If YOU would in the air force and President Trump ordered you to bomb your home town, what you YOU do? I have a pretty good idea of what I would do, and it might involve an orange stain on the rubble on Washington.
What you describe is a sub-type of one type of HFT.
The supertype of what you describe is called market making. Official market makers are REQUIRED to always have standing buy and sell orders for the same security, meaning they are willing to either buy or sell, guaranteeing that you and I can buy or sell whenever we'd like to (the market maker must sell when we want to buy and vice-versa). That's pretty much the definition of providing liquidity. The market maker isn't there to hold on to the stock, they are there to sell it to whoever wants to buy it and buy it from whoever wants to sell it. The stock could go up during the interval, or it could go down, so the market maker wants to get rid of it excess inventory as quickly as possible. Therefore yes, they'll often sell to one person half a second after buying from another. Unofficial market makers work the same way, without the commitment. They're always ready to buy sell at 100 and buy at 99.98.
What you describe, someone who looks for pairs of buy/sell and tries to squeeze market-maker orders in between, exists, too, of course, but there's not much room for a simple paired buy-sell of the same security. More often, it's a multiway order of different trades in cycle, described below. Most paired buy/sell orders of a single security like you describe are taking market maker positions, basically selling liquidity.
More HFT algorithms look for different types of this broad category of scenarios:
Sue wants to exchange Argentine pesos for Australian dollars. Bob wants to exchange Australian dollars for Kenyan shillings. Kevin wants to exchange Kenyan shillings for Australian dollars.
Left to themselves, Sue, Bob, and Kevin are stuck and get nowhere because nobody wants to take the other side of any of those trades. Helen, an HFT trader, recognizes that she can buy some $AUS and trade them to Sue for pesos, then trade the pesos to Bob for shillings, then trade the shillings to Kevin. Bob, Sue, and Kevin get the exchanges they wanted to make and Helen earns a small profit by facilitating it.
Thanks for that. That appears to be fairly simple to use, on a newer kernel. Reading about it also led me to a couple of other security topics I want to read more about.
Exactly what part of "I need to update my knowledge" is unclear to you? Or did you not bother to read even the subject line of my post before replying with your idiocy?
> so-called 'mega-ships' are not new > They have been prying he oceans for the past few years already
A lot longer than a few years. Caligula's "Giant Ship" was built 2,000 years ago. It was considered huge, 100 meters long. The Titanic was - well, titanic, at 269 meters. Sixty years later, the Nimitz was a mega ship at 332 meters. This week, the 400 meter Benjamin Franklin is a mega ship.
People have been building "the biggest ship ever built" for thousands of years.
Twitter is so behind the times, only investing millions in Magic Ponies. For six years already the federal government has been investing billions giving it to people selling unicorn farts.
I read "blahblah now has blah support for blahblah Docker in blah, meaning blahblah for Red Hat blah and blah". Apparently my knowledge about containers is a bit out date and I need to do some reading.
I bet some of those names might related to a way that I can easily isolate my browser within a container, without any significant performance impact. I'll need to learn some new vocabulary first, though.
> Considering HFT does nothing for the company who's stocks are being traded
There are some problems with high-frequency trading, so don't misunderstand what I'm about to say. I'm NOT saying "HFT is great."
A more liquid asset is more valuable than an otherwise equalivent illiquid asset. HFT increases the liquidity of the stock, and therefore its value (slightly).
Also, investors don't like illogical markets. If the stock of company A and company B are both $100, and a mutual fund is equally invested in each, the mutual fund should have the same value. Similarly, 90% of Yahoo's value is the Alibaba stock they own. If the price of Yahoo is much higher or lower than Alibaba's, that's illogical and makes investors nervous. HFT removes this disparities, slightly increasing the value.
They weren't even browsing. They were playing a video. They tested the power consumption of the -video player- and claimed it was great test of the -browser-. Why did they release this test? Probably because the ones that involved browsing showed Edge to be a major loser.
Indeed it sounds like OP's job isn't defined enough that solutions can be proposed, first problems / obstacles need to be identified. Talk to the people and find out what issues there are, what makes their job more difficult. Then look at how you can help the situation.
Others have mentioned avoid micro-managing, treat people as adults. That's important.
One thing the OP can look at is the maturity of development process and provide resources and training to improve it, preferably resources and training that apply to more than one group. By maturity I mean things like: Is source control used consistently? Are the development and deployment processes well documented? Are testing good procedures in place before a product goes to production? Do each team even HAVE devel, test, and production systems? Is code review / peer review used? Are there WORTHWHILE metrics to measure progress?
If documentation of processes is lacking, you can set up a wiki or some other resource that makes it easy to create and use documentation. If source control is chaotic you can set up a robust, easy-to-use source control system. For example, we use Kiln to provide a searchable web based GUI which helps explore git and Mercurial repos.
For long time, I had probably the largest database of active bots and open proxies. I haven't counted for a while, but I don't think I have a million. That's one hell of an attack. Typically we see hundreds to a few thousand used in each attack.
Since you (or your business) selected software with a one-year license, which may or may not be available again next year, I hope there is a plan for when you need to switch. Personally I like to ensure that at least the data is in an accessible format, so that it CAN be imported into other software. I strongly prefer open source software, so I can keep using the same software (even maintaining it if required). Sometimes closed-source might make more sense, though.
> I hate this model as much as you do, but that's how software licensing works.
I don't use any software that has a time-limited, leased license. Do you?
That's not "how software licensing works", it's what South Australia wanted because they had planned to replace the software when the other software was ready. Then they changed their mind and now they wish they had purchased a regular perpetual license rather than trying to save money by leasing it.
South Australia had orignially planned for this to be a short term solution until a replacement was ready. So they found somebody willing to do the lease they wanted, rather than a standard perpetual license. They figured they would save money that way, since they weren't going to use it very long.
Then they changed their mind. They wanted a lease. They paid for a lease until March. That's why they should have it until March.
You CAN keep using Windows 7, for as ling as you want. The standard license for software is indefinite. South Australia planned to replace this software after something else was available, so they chose to lease a short term solution. Now they changed their mind and wish they had bought a regular software license instead.
Switching can sure be a pain for types of software, if it's the center of your enterprise. It sure is silly to lease that kind of software for a few years rather than but (or build) it.
Of course, the article says they choose to lease because from the very beginning they planned to replace it. So the plan all along was that they would replace it, but now they decided they'd rather not. That kinda sucks, but when you can't make up your mind, can't make a decision, you sometimes end up an inconvenient position.
The movie is explicitly a STAR TREK fan film. Not a "low budget sci-fi flik". If it's a STAR TREK film, that's called a derivative work. Same characters (both individuals and groups like Klingons and Star Fleet), extending the Star Trek plot lines forward or backward in time, etc.
You ask "which Star Trek work". Several, actually, each an separate violation of copyright law. Their use of Kilngons is derived from each and every time Star Trek used Klingons.
Slashdot Mirror
> It's like the actual movie starts 20 minutes after the movie start time.
At my theater, the movie starts twelve minutes after the published time. I show ten minutes after the published time, two minutes before the movie. This is helpful to know when you look at the listings and there is a showing that is "about to start" and it looks like you can;t get there on time.
I've moved away from the partisan fan club and now see things from a more objective viewpoint than I used to. I can see bad things about both trump and Clinton, and good things about both.
The political establishment was #nevertrump. He's not being politically correct, he's not doing and saying the things that the RNC and the party leaders would have him say and do. His proposals are very different from what we've seen mainstream winning candidates propose. I think he, like Rand Paul, would be different. Some good different, some bad different. Hard to know the net effect.
Clinton has been involved in politics since 1977. The head of the Democratic party was Clinton's employee a few years ago. A year ago, the DNC assumed she'd be the nominee. Clinton is as much "politics as usual" as you can possibly get.
So that's a difference between them. Clinton is very much Washington, she's the DNC incarnate. She says whatever the Democrat pollsters determine is best to say that day. Trump is Trump, and he says what he thinks; he doesn't care what the Republican party thinks.
> The person that invented pop-up ads should have been imprisoned and tortured for life for the trillion headaches it has plagued society with.
I happened to be around at that time. I knew the people who were likely the first to use popups, within the first few sites anyway. I think the first person who used popups probably wouldn't have, had they known where it would end up. Not that it would have mattered, Xpics and certain other companies would have gotten the ball rolling.
Some people make it a point to arrive at a movie theater early enough to see the "previews" aka ads . TV has multiple commercial breaks in the middle of the show. On my web sites, "related links" come at the end, after you're done with the content. These are very different in terms of how much I value avoiding them. I'd pay a much higher price spread to avoid ads interrupting a show than ads at the end, which I can so easily ignore.
Netflix also the menu and guide screens. A banner ad there is much less objectionable than a video preroll. Also better than a preroll is one-second audio like "Welcome to Mythbusters, brought to you by Shapeways."
I couldn't begin to put a price on avoiding ads until you tell me what kind of ad you're talking about.
Ps - yet another variable is what is advertised. If Mythbusters had ads for for other similar shows and for hobbyist 3D printers, that would be less objectionable than ads for Enzyte Male Enhancement, because I might actually be INTERESTED in 20 seconds of information about a new hobby-grade 3D printer.
Yeah it's limiting. One popular use is for high value real estate. That will be allowed, if for example you're selling a home with land, or any retail/ office real estate with a parking lot. Block the driveways some time when the business is closed and you're good to go.
I shoot fireworks shows. Fireworks shows have been popular with drone operators. In fact, there is a real nice professional looking drone video of one of my shows on Youtube. It just so happens that when we launch explosives into the air, we make sure there is nobody underneath, so drones can be used to video fireworks shows.
I'm sure there are many more examples. What is not clear is how they'll treat flight over areas where it's UNLIKELY that you'll fly over any people, such as some lakes and rivers, mountainous areas, etc. I suppose the operator can watch to be sure they don't fly DIRECTLY over any boats. Based on how the FAA handles ultralight aircraft, I think they'll be reasonable. Flying over any rural area will probably be generally okay of you're otherwise being safe; even though there is a small chance that a farmer on a tractor could drive under your flight path.
All of US military history is the big ol army repeatedly losing to a bunch of rebels with rifles, and even smoothbore muskets. For fifteen years the US military has been in Afghanistan fighting rebels with rifles and pickup trucks. (yes, they declared "victory" and evacuated most US troops a few years ago, but they are still fighting there too.) See also the USSR experience in the same location. The US began when the most powerful military in the world was defeated by a silversmith, a printer, and their drinking buddies. Between then we've had Vietnam (the US military can EASILY defeat a bunch of poor people in 12 foot fishing boats, right?) and several others.
These are all examples where the entire US military was united, the whole US military vs foreign rebels.How many US servicemen and women would fire on their own families, do you think? If YOU would in the air force and President Trump ordered you to bomb your home town, what you YOU do? I have a pretty good idea of what I would do, and it might involve an orange stain on the rubble on Washington.
Quoting the new regulation:
Small unmanned aircraft may not operate over any persons
not directly participating in the operation
What you describe is a sub-type of one type of HFT.
The supertype of what you describe is called market making. Official market makers are REQUIRED to always have standing buy and sell orders for the same security, meaning they are willing to either buy or sell, guaranteeing that you and I can buy or sell whenever we'd like to (the market maker must sell when we want to buy and vice-versa). That's pretty much the definition of providing liquidity. The market maker isn't there to hold on to the stock, they are there to sell it to whoever wants to buy it and buy it from whoever wants to sell it. The stock could go up during the interval, or it could go down, so the market maker wants to get rid of it excess inventory as quickly as possible. Therefore yes, they'll often sell to one person half a second after buying from another. Unofficial market makers work the same way, without the commitment. They're always ready to buy sell at 100 and buy at 99.98.
What you describe, someone who looks for pairs of buy/sell and tries to squeeze market-maker orders in between, exists, too, of course, but there's not much room for a simple paired buy-sell of the same security. More often, it's a multiway order of different trades in cycle, described below. Most paired buy/sell orders of a single security like you describe are taking market maker positions, basically selling liquidity.
More HFT algorithms look for different types of this broad category of scenarios:
Sue wants to exchange Argentine pesos for Australian dollars.
Bob wants to exchange Australian dollars for Kenyan shillings.
Kevin wants to exchange Kenyan shillings for Australian dollars.
Left to themselves, Sue, Bob, and Kevin are stuck and get nowhere because nobody wants to take the other side of any of those trades. Helen, an HFT trader, recognizes that she can buy some $AUS and trade them to Sue for pesos, then trade the pesos to Bob for shillings, then trade the shillings to Kevin. Bob, Sue, and Kevin get the exchanges they wanted to make and Helen earns a small profit by facilitating it.
Thanks for that. That appears to be fairly simple to use, on a newer kernel. Reading about it also led me to a couple of other security topics I want to read more about.
Exactly what part of "I need to update my knowledge" is unclear to you? Or did you not bother to read even the subject line of my post before replying with your idiocy?
> so-called 'mega-ships' are not new
> They have been prying he oceans for the past few years already
A lot longer than a few years. Caligula's "Giant Ship" was built 2,000 years ago. It was considered huge, 100 meters long. The Titanic was - well, titanic, at 269 meters. Sixty years later, the Nimitz was a mega ship at 332 meters. This week, the 400 meter Benjamin Franklin is a mega ship.
People have been building "the biggest ship ever built" for thousands of years.
Thanks for that. Sounds like I can pretend that Ansible is something like Chef or Puppet and I get the gist. Maybe lieghter,
> And no, _some_ investors love illogical markets. It lets them take their rakeoff from the rubes.
You're speaking of TRADERS, not investors. Investors like stable and logical markets.
Twitter is so behind the times, only investing millions in Magic Ponies. For six years already the federal government has been investing billions giving it to people selling unicorn farts.
I read "blahblah now has blah support for blahblah Docker in blah, meaning blahblah for Red Hat blah and blah". Apparently my knowledge about containers is a bit out date and I need to do some reading.
I bet some of those names might related to a way that I can easily isolate my browser within a container, without any significant performance impact. I'll need to learn some new vocabulary first, though.
> Considering HFT does nothing for the company who's stocks are being traded
There are some problems with high-frequency trading, so don't misunderstand what I'm about to say. I'm NOT saying "HFT is great."
A more liquid asset is more valuable than an otherwise equalivent illiquid asset. HFT increases the liquidity of the stock, and therefore its value (slightly).
Also, investors don't like illogical markets. If the stock of company A and company B are both $100, and a mutual fund is equally invested in each, the mutual fund should have the same value. Similarly, 90% of Yahoo's value is the Alibaba stock they own. If the price of Yahoo is much higher or lower than Alibaba's, that's illogical and makes investors nervous. HFT removes this disparities, slightly increasing the value.
They weren't even browsing. They were playing a video. They tested the power consumption of the -video player- and claimed it was great test of the -browser-. Why did they release this test? Probably because the ones that involved browsing showed Edge to be a major loser.
Indeed it sounds like OP's job isn't defined enough that solutions can be proposed, first problems / obstacles need to be identified. Talk to the people and find out what issues there are, what makes their job more difficult. Then look at how you can help the situation.
Others have mentioned avoid micro-managing, treat people as adults. That's important.
One thing the OP can look at is the maturity of development process and provide resources and training to improve it, preferably resources and training that apply to more than one group. By maturity I mean things like:
Is source control used consistently?
Are the development and deployment processes well documented?
Are testing good procedures in place before a product goes to production?
Do each team even HAVE devel, test, and production systems?
Is code review / peer review used?
Are there WORTHWHILE metrics to measure progress?
If documentation of processes is lacking, you can set up a wiki or some other resource that makes it easy to create and use documentation. If source control is chaotic you can set up a robust, easy-to-use source control system. For example, we use Kiln to provide a searchable web based GUI which helps explore git and Mercurial repos.
For long time, I had probably the largest database of active bots and open proxies. I haven't counted for a while, but I don't think I have a million. That's one hell of an attack. Typically we see hundreds to a few thousand used in each attack.
Since you (or your business) selected software with a one-year license, which may or may not be available again next year, I hope there is a plan for when you need to switch. Personally I like to ensure that at least the data is in an accessible format, so that it CAN be imported into other software. I strongly prefer open source software, so I can keep using the same software (even maintaining it if required). Sometimes closed-source might make more sense, though.
> I hate this model as much as you do, but that's how software licensing works.
I don't use any software that has a time-limited, leased license. Do you?
That's not "how software licensing works", it's what South Australia wanted because they had planned to replace the software when the other software was ready. Then they changed their mind and now they wish they had purchased a regular perpetual license rather than trying to save money by leasing it.
South Australia had orignially planned for this to be a short term solution until a replacement was ready. So they found somebody willing to do the lease they wanted, rather than a standard perpetual license. They figured they would save money that way, since they weren't going to use it very long.
Then they changed their mind. They wanted a lease. They paid for a lease until March. That's why they should have it until March.
You CAN keep using Windows 7, for as ling as you want. The standard license for software is indefinite. South Australia planned to replace this software after something else was available, so they chose to lease a short term solution. Now they changed their mind and wish they had bought a regular software license instead.
Switching can sure be a pain for types of software, if it's the center of your enterprise. It sure is silly to lease that kind of software for a few years rather than but (or build) it.
Of course, the article says they choose to lease because from the very beginning they planned to replace it. So the plan all along was that they would replace it, but now they decided they'd rather not. That kinda sucks, but when you can't make up your mind, can't make a decision, you sometimes end up an inconvenient position.
The movie is explicitly a STAR TREK fan film. Not a "low budget sci-fi flik". If it's a STAR TREK film, that's called a derivative work. Same characters (both individuals and groups like Klingons and Star Fleet), extending the Star Trek plot lines forward or backward in time, etc.
You ask "which Star Trek work". Several, actually, each an separate violation of copyright law. Their use of Kilngons is derived from each and every time Star Trek used Klingons.