Seriously? Yeah, if you need broadband internet access 24/7 to find a job, and can't do your searches and email by accessing freely available sources a couple of times a day, I wouldn't hire you.
It is an interesting idea but I fear it will work with a group of students that would do well anyway.
I really would rather see him dump money into an inner city school or even offering scholarships or loan forgiveness for teachers.
Lets not change too many variables at once. Work the kinks out with low risk students and then bring in the high risk students.
Why didn't she go into STEM? Does she regret that decision? Would her life have been better if she had dropped all this diversity nonsense and pursued a career in programming instead? Or is this not really about the girls and women, but rather about benefits to the company? Note that I actually believe there is a practical benefit to the company from genuine diversity.
If he did this on an actual aircraft in flight (he didn't, it's BS) then he put the lives of everyone on that plane in danger. They don't let flight control software on a plane without a well understood pedigree for a reason and he was mucking with that. If he did this on an actual plane in flight (he didn't) he belongs in jail. If he didn't do it (he didn't) then he is basically confessing to a crime that wasn't committed, and perhaps he should be committed himself, that or the FBI is full of shit and it wouldn't be the first time for that. If the entertainment system actually has a way to send data to the critical flight control systems then a bunch of engineers and executives belong in jail right beside him, and throw in some FAA folks for good measure.
A capability very similar to what you are talking about is already in place on many lines. Just not that one. This point was discussed in several articles about this crash. This tragedy is going to force them to increase the coverage of the system.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The way it seems to work in the US is that you have a bunch of politicians who want X bill to pass, but some others that either don't want it, or don't care. However these others want unrelated provision Y to become law. The two sides make a handshake deal and combine the different topics in one bill. Or one side of the aisle doesn't want a bill to pass but they don't want to be seen voting against it, so they add some rider to the bill that is completely unpalatable to the other side. Or the other way, one side wants a provision that the other would never pass, so they add it onto something that must pass (veterans benefits, say). It's a win-win for the first side because they will either get their rider, or they can slam the other side for being anti-veteran. Happens all the f-ing time. And I agree that all this stuff is BS. Every topic should get a straight up or down vote. I think it was in the state of MN that they have a constitutional provision that requires one bill to be one (broad) topic. They fought the concealed carry law (and won) based on the fact that it was passed with a department of natural resources budget bill. Concealed carry passed separately later on.
Understand that even though the bill was something that was, on the surface, completely unrelated, it actually amends the relevant code. So if you want to know what's in the copyright code, you would look at the copyright code once it is modified. In the old days I can see this as being problematic, but with everything online just finding the current language isn't a problem.
You just countered your own argument. Time is something that when taken can't be gotten back. When you copy something you do not deny the legal holder the use of whatever it was.
I've seen this done twice. The company reorganizes the departments such that it isn't so much a "skill" issue, it's a "skill mix" issue. The help desk people don't know how to also be Linux Admins, the Linux Admins don't know how to also be COBOL programmers, the COBOL programmers can't also be web developers. Then they post the new job classifications at cheap rates so that few permanent US residents want to take the jobs. Once they got the new people in, the org changed again so that a year later is was back to being pretty close to the way it started.
I think it is pretty clear. If there is any doubt all you have to do is read Zuckerberg and you should know this isn't altruistic. After eliminating many of the teachers he'll use this to classify the rest as "Tech Workers" and replace them with H1Bs. If any doubt,remained the first sentence in the summary says "...announced Monday a $100 million Series B round led by established VC firms and high-profile tech investors..."
As a former semi driver and still current CDL-A holder, I would like to say the parent was exactly right and your attitude is not helpful. Truck drivers do absolutely have a duty to drive responsibly and not put others in harms way. Too many drivers out there take what happens on the road personally. Take the emotion out of it. I know that can be hard to do, but it is necessary for your safety and sanity if you are going to be driving 8+ hours a day. I have seen plenty of shitty driving at every level from bicycles to motorcycles, to cars, to light trucks, and up to double and triple trailer semis. EVERYONE, you included, has a duty to drive in such a way as to minimize risk to those around them. You can't stop as fast as a passenger car? Leave more room. Someone cuts in front of you, back off and recover your margin. There will be times when that means you are driving slower than surrounding traffic because people keep cutting in while you try to maintain your margin. You will still be moving forward. You, as a (supposedly) professional driver are (and should be) held to a higher standard.
Technically, you can't hire someone to directly replace a laid off worker for some period of time. What you have to do is shuffle the org so that your existing employees don't have the right "skill mix" for the way the company will operate in the future. Then you hire the H1B's whose resumes exactly match the posting (miraculously). Whether the new org sticks or not isn't important.
Yes, that's the problem. Once it starts it tends to build on itself. That is why it is better to spread it out more. Not 200+ units in one development.
You don't do "affordable housing" at cost. It is almost always below cost. He will lose money on this unless he makes it section 8, in which case he will get government vouchers. Not that making money is his goal.
Not sure where you are going with this. The reference was to Air Traffic Control (ATC) systems, not aircraft. The centrifuges don't run Windows, Windows was just a vector in the attack. ATC systems are not typically running Windows either; modern systems are running on Java and Linux, which are also vulnerable.
If you can't make the mental leap from that analogy, then I'm not sure a different one would help unless it was specific to ATC. It doesn't take the NSA to pay off a janitor to plug a thumb drive into a PC. And yes, I know the target systems aren't Windows, but Linux isn't invulnerable either. This doesn't even have to be at an FAA location. This could be at Raytheon or Lockheed Martin, or whoever is responsible for development of that particular system.
I'm trying to figure out if you are thinking of the potential attackers as a bunch of goat herders sitting in mud huts
There are specific procedures the pilots are supposed to follow when sensors give bad data. The case you cite, the pilots were aware that something was wrong and did not follow the correct procedure.
The problem is that we are living in a sort of no man's land in between manual and automated. Automated enough that the humans don't pay attention, but not automated enough that the systems can handle a multiple fail scenario.
One of the problems with the current situation is that aircraft require BOTH Humans AND Computers to do their jobs. Neither one by themselves can cover for the other one.
Re:and we will need basic income to cover the peop
on
Planes Without Pilots
·
· Score: 1
and we will need basic income to cover the people automated out of a job
Airlines are already complaining about a shortage of pilots today. This will take years and people growing up will have the opportunity to pursue something else, like, I don't know, the technology for automating aircraft. And those military drone pilots will have an almost direct path into civilian employment, assuming that they can get over Macho Grande.
You could also tell Tim Cook to put his money where his mouth is, but it isn't his money. It's the shareholders' money, and he is ultimately beholden to them.
Really? Tim Cook disagrees with you... " “If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock,” "
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously? Yeah, if you need broadband internet access 24/7 to find a job, and can't do your searches and email by accessing freely available sources a couple of times a day, I wouldn't hire you.
don't be dense. You don't need 24/7 access to the internet to job hunt. There are lots of places you can go get access for free.
You don't need broadband to call 911, or answer a job call-back, or answer a call from your kid's school.
It is an interesting idea but I fear it will work with a group of students that would do well anyway. I really would rather see him dump money into an inner city school or even offering scholarships or loan forgiveness for teachers.
Lets not change too many variables at once. Work the kinks out with low risk students and then bring in the high risk students.
Why didn't she go into STEM? Does she regret that decision? Would her life have been better if she had dropped all this diversity nonsense and pursued a career in programming instead? Or is this not really about the girls and women, but rather about benefits to the company? Note that I actually believe there is a practical benefit to the company from genuine diversity.
Isn't an "installation problem" by definition a design problem?
Aren't we passed the days of process not being part of design?
Depends. Did whoever follow the process? The design/process should make it easy, but the world is always inventing better idiots.
If he did this on an actual aircraft in flight (he didn't, it's BS) then he put the lives of everyone on that plane in danger. They don't let flight control software on a plane without a well understood pedigree for a reason and he was mucking with that. If he did this on an actual plane in flight (he didn't) he belongs in jail. If he didn't do it (he didn't) then he is basically confessing to a crime that wasn't committed, and perhaps he should be committed himself, that or the FBI is full of shit and it wouldn't be the first time for that. If the entertainment system actually has a way to send data to the critical flight control systems then a bunch of engineers and executives belong in jail right beside him, and throw in some FAA folks for good measure.
A capability very similar to what you are talking about is already in place on many lines. Just not that one. This point was discussed in several articles about this crash. This tragedy is going to force them to increase the coverage of the system.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The way it seems to work in the US is that you have a bunch of politicians who want X bill to pass, but some others that either don't want it, or don't care. However these others want unrelated provision Y to become law. The two sides make a handshake deal and combine the different topics in one bill. Or one side of the aisle doesn't want a bill to pass but they don't want to be seen voting against it, so they add some rider to the bill that is completely unpalatable to the other side. Or the other way, one side wants a provision that the other would never pass, so they add it onto something that must pass (veterans benefits, say). It's a win-win for the first side because they will either get their rider, or they can slam the other side for being anti-veteran. Happens all the f-ing time. And I agree that all this stuff is BS. Every topic should get a straight up or down vote. I think it was in the state of MN that they have a constitutional provision that requires one bill to be one (broad) topic. They fought the concealed carry law (and won) based on the fact that it was passed with a department of natural resources budget bill. Concealed carry passed separately later on.
Understand that even though the bill was something that was, on the surface, completely unrelated, it actually amends the relevant code. So if you want to know what's in the copyright code, you would look at the copyright code once it is modified. In the old days I can see this as being problematic, but with everything online just finding the current language isn't a problem.
You just countered your own argument. Time is something that when taken can't be gotten back. When you copy something you do not deny the legal holder the use of whatever it was.
I've seen this done twice. The company reorganizes the departments such that it isn't so much a "skill" issue, it's a "skill mix" issue. The help desk people don't know how to also be Linux Admins, the Linux Admins don't know how to also be COBOL programmers, the COBOL programmers can't also be web developers. Then they post the new job classifications at cheap rates so that few permanent US residents want to take the jobs. Once they got the new people in, the org changed again so that a year later is was back to being pretty close to the way it started.
I think it is pretty clear. If there is any doubt all you have to do is read Zuckerberg and you should know this isn't altruistic. After eliminating many of the teachers he'll use this to classify the rest as "Tech Workers" and replace them with H1Bs. If any doubt,remained the first sentence in the summary says "...announced Monday a $100 million Series B round led by established VC firms and high-profile tech investors..."
As a former semi driver and still current CDL-A holder, I would like to say the parent was exactly right and your attitude is not helpful. Truck drivers do absolutely have a duty to drive responsibly and not put others in harms way. Too many drivers out there take what happens on the road personally. Take the emotion out of it. I know that can be hard to do, but it is necessary for your safety and sanity if you are going to be driving 8+ hours a day. I have seen plenty of shitty driving at every level from bicycles to motorcycles, to cars, to light trucks, and up to double and triple trailer semis. EVERYONE, you included, has a duty to drive in such a way as to minimize risk to those around them. You can't stop as fast as a passenger car? Leave more room. Someone cuts in front of you, back off and recover your margin. There will be times when that means you are driving slower than surrounding traffic because people keep cutting in while you try to maintain your margin. You will still be moving forward. You, as a (supposedly) professional driver are (and should be) held to a higher standard.
Technically, you can't hire someone to directly replace a laid off worker for some period of time. What you have to do is shuffle the org so that your existing employees don't have the right "skill mix" for the way the company will operate in the future. Then you hire the H1B's whose resumes exactly match the posting (miraculously). Whether the new org sticks or not isn't important.
Yes, but SJ is gone now. Which is why we have bigger iPhones, crappy Apple TV, iPad physical specs getting worse, corporate charitable contributions,
Yes, that's the problem. Once it starts it tends to build on itself. That is why it is better to spread it out more. Not 200+ units in one development.
All true, but to really do that right you need to spread it out more. You don't put all the housing in one development with 200+ families.
You don't do "affordable housing" at cost. It is almost always below cost. He will lose money on this unless he makes it section 8, in which case he will get government vouchers. Not that making money is his goal.
Not sure where you are going with this. The reference was to Air Traffic Control (ATC) systems, not aircraft. The centrifuges don't run Windows, Windows was just a vector in the attack. ATC systems are not typically running Windows either; modern systems are running on Java and Linux, which are also vulnerable.
If you can't make the mental leap from that analogy, then I'm not sure a different one would help unless it was specific to ATC. It doesn't take the NSA to pay off a janitor to plug a thumb drive into a PC. And yes, I know the target systems aren't Windows, but Linux isn't invulnerable either. This doesn't even have to be at an FAA location. This could be at Raytheon or Lockheed Martin, or whoever is responsible for development of that particular system.
I'm trying to figure out if you are thinking of the potential attackers as a bunch of goat herders sitting in mud huts
You are saying that nobody but the NSA is capable of exploiting human weakness to breach air gapped systems. Really?
There are specific procedures the pilots are supposed to follow when sensors give bad data. The case you cite, the pilots were aware that something was wrong and did not follow the correct procedure.
The problem is that we are living in a sort of no man's land in between manual and automated. Automated enough that the humans don't pay attention, but not automated enough that the systems can handle a multiple fail scenario.
One of the problems with the current situation is that aircraft require BOTH Humans AND Computers to do their jobs. Neither one by themselves can cover for the other one.
And no, ATC systems are not net connected.
And neither were the centrifuges in Iran
and we will need basic income to cover the people automated out of a job
Airlines are already complaining about a shortage of pilots today. This will take years and people growing up will have the opportunity to pursue something else, like, I don't know, the technology for automating aircraft. And those military drone pilots will have an almost direct path into civilian employment, assuming that they can get over Macho Grande.
You could also tell Tim Cook to put his money where his mouth is, but it isn't his money. It's the shareholders' money, and he is ultimately beholden to them.
Really? Tim Cook disagrees with you... " “If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock,” "