It's like someone has posted a theory on the internet which is wrong, but not knowing where the thrust comes from means they can't explain to this person why he's wrong. And it irks them to no end.
And this is a good thing, This is just exactly how science works - people repeatedly testing it and testing it until we finally come up with a theory as to why it works the way it does, and what applecart gets upset because of it.
Perhaps there's some new science out there. Maybe. Or it's something that's just been unaccounted for. Or maybe it's a complete fraud. The best thing is, people are curious and they're trying to find out why. When that answer comes out, it means we've just increased our understanding of the world, which isn't a bad thing.
the rendering engine is the same (WebKit), but the JavaScript interpreter/JIT is different; Safari uses Nitro; which non-Safari apps can't use.
The reason for this is Nitro compiles Javascript code to native code, something most high end JavaScript engines do these days. But that introduces an obvious security hole, so what Apple did was sandbox Safari even more so Safari can't do things that regular applications can to avoid security issues.
Regular UIWebView applications can't use this because it would be too limiting an environment, so they use a safer interpreter to do it.
The real question becomes - is it a bug in UIWebView, or is it a series of bugs that exploit UIWebView and then Chrome itself, so that any change could easily disrupt the bug?
Why? why should anyone just be given something when they choose not to contribute in any way? Why should people doing the right thing by producing something of value and taking care of themselves ALSO shoulder the burden of taking care of someone else?
I think you seriously underestimate the number of people that would choose to be nothing more but parasites and dead weight.
First of all - people who are like that right now are the homeless beggars you see on the street. So right now, we're not in any good position to say we're superior, because those people cause petty crime to go up, cause us to pay more already in increased food prices (stores have to cover the shrinkage), health care costs (emergency room visits are the most expensive form of medical care available, and people who can't pay - we all pay for their care), as well as many other demonstrated costs of homelessness.
Yes, you'll find a few people "on the dole" with basic income. Which is fine. But you have to realize that living on this gives you the basics only. Maybe you can get cable TV, most likely, it's just OTA. Maybe you can have a cellphone, but it ain't gonna be the latest and greatest smartphone - if you can even get one. Maybe just a basic phone. You aren't going to eat at fancy restaurants, or eat out - you'll afford groceries and have t cook it yourself. Internet? Well, hope you like 1Mbps. A car? Forget it - bike, walk or public transit. A house? You're probably going to be put in a 1-room apartment (probably 200 square feet max), to which you may share a kitchen and a bathroom with other residents. It's basic, it's functional, and livable.
The nice thing is, you an "upgrade" your lifestyle by working. And in basic income, your basic income is simply taxed back so you can earn quite a bit more before the entire amount is clawed back in taxes.
Take on a menial job and you'll probably keep 80% of the basic income, so now you can upgrade your lifestyle. Perhaps you want to move out of that one bedroom apartment and into one where you have your own bathroom and kitchen! (And maybe even laundry!) Or buy a newer computer, or a tablet, or a smartphone. Or simply eat nicer food, or go and eat out.
Face it - living on the dole is possible. But you give up a lot for it. It's almost like a military boot camp - except you can decide you've had enough, get off your ass, and actually upgrade your lifestyle. Far too many people are simply stuck - they have menial jobs that barely pay to live, and yet they can't quit or they'd be on the street. Those jobs are tough, so fat chance of being able to attend school to upgrade yourself to a better job. And welfare often is a disincentive to work since every dollar you make, is a dollar you lose
And given increased automation in our lives, perhaps it's time to realize that most work should be given to the robots to do, but as a society we need to take care of those who now are out of a job, are stuck spending long hours in some other menial job for now, to which they can't upgrade themselves with new skills because of a lack of time.
And you know what? Human nature has it that a lot of people will want to upgrade. Most basic income schemes, when they tried it, actually worked - all the negative livability indicators (homelessness, crime, general decay) went down, the government saves money because it doesn't have to administer a million programs that serves niches, etc.
A billion Android devices & chrome books include busybox.
Android doesn't use BusyBox. Some SoC providers might in their Android BSPs, but it is NOT standard in Android. The reason is the license - BusyBox is GPL, Android prefers Apache, and the only GPL component in it is the Linux kernel.
Android DOES provide an Apache licensed piece of code that works similarly to BusyBox, but it isn't BusyBox. (Many SoC vendors provide BusyBox in theri BSPs because it aids debugging, while the Android native one provides just enough for basic operation).
Otherwise the Busybox team would have their hands full going after all those manufacturers shipping their code without source.
Was there *any* practical difference between the two books? Calculus at the college level (talking about the US, other places teach the same in HS) has been settled for more than 150 years, any competently-written book will teach the same material.
Well, the $180 book was recommended, while the $75 book required "online free supplementary materials".
But from a teaching perspective, probably not. And to be honest, I'd take the $75+online materials over the self-contained $180 version. Because those online materials probably can cover tricky topics another way, so if you don't get something as it was described in the textbook, the online version probably explains it in a different way so you understand it better. Even better, it's an automatic resource those students can use for their other classes!
The AOPA wants all UAS out of the sky because they compete with General Aviation.
Incorrect. AOPA wants UAS to follow all the same rules if they want to integrate into the National Airspace System. So if your drone is big enough to fly with regular aircraft, then it should follow the same rules as regular aircraft. Which means if has all the same equipment (radios/transponders/etc) necessary to communicate with ATC and everything.
Drones covers the spectrum from toys to Predator-sized vehicles (which are huge planes - much bigger than your typical Cessna). Even man-carried drones are often quite large and well capably of flying a few thousand feet in the air... right into where airplanes fly.
Your typical DJI like drone will probably not even have to deal with this unless you fly it close to an airport where you have planes at low altitudes. But something like the Google or Amazon drone quite likely has the power and the size to be disruptive.
As many are aware, the US has quite a higher number of serial killers than most countries, in addition to mass murderers. Lots of people are suggesting that revoking the second amendment is the solution, but not only is that going to be a wasted effort (you wouldn't even be able to get a portion of congress to be on board, and even then, an act of congress just isn't enough) but it likely won't solve any problems.
That said, it would be wise if we could better understand what motivates most people to do this when they do it, and address it from that angle. I think this would go a long way towards that end.
Easy - easy access to guns.
In other countries, like say, Canada, guns are much harder to get, so you generally get the mentally ill doing oddball things and generally harming only themselves because the only weapon they get access to is a knife, or a stick. Usually also hopped up on some drug or other that you can get easily.
it's a crisis here too, but instead of them shooting everyone up, they get shot at by police.
That said, mental illness is a rather large problem (easily 1 in 3 have some form of it), and many cases aren't entirely visible, leading to families always claiming "he was never violent". And really, even if you tried to prevent it, a reasonably intelligent but mentally ill person would be able to acquire the necessary firepower in the US.
I think that's really the only difference - the reason we don't have mass shootings is because getting a gun is much harder - you either have to illegally obtain them, or if you try legal channels, there are many roadblocks in the way before you're given the gun (i.e., you need a permit).
The libraries here affix a clear plastic book cover over top of the book and jacket, protecting it. Then they apply stickers with text and bar codes on top of the book cover.
Which is a good way to do it if you want to audit your friend's book collection or something - just put on a cover and it makes it distinct so when you go to your friend's place, you can ask them about your book.
But to be honest - are you lending books of significant value to you? If so, then maybe keeping track of your stuff is what you need to do, of it's of super value to you, either buy a lending copy, or don't lend out that particular book (if your friends are friends, they will understand if something has significant value to you). If not, well, realize that it's probably gone, buy another copy if you want, and move on. Lend stuff out, you're bound to lose some stuff. Deal with it and move on.
It goes both ways too - your friends lend stuff to you.
But diesels can meet emission standards honestly if auto makers include a urea tank. They just fear consumer reaction to having another consumable fluid (that needs to be refilled every 9 thousand miles, or so) and don't want to do the heavy lifting of consumer education
Since the urea consumption is proportionate to fuel consumption (about 1:100), the easy solution is to fill both at the pump. I mean, either use a nozzle that will dispense both together or a special filler nozzle. That way the consumer simply dispenses "clean diesel" into their car and everything's taken care of.
No need to remember to fill another tank or anything - you just fill up like you normally do.
There's more nuance to things in real life unfortunately. A car manufacturer can certainly get a competitive advantage over retailers since they own a monopoly on supply. It will result in much of the money from car purchases being siphoned away from a local business towards non-taxed multi-national corporations. It might seem like it's a win for the consumer on one front, but the community will lose income and jobs. Don't expect local politicians to support this experiment you devised.
Car sales are basically no-profit events to a dealership. They make so little per car (a few hundred bucks) that really, the manufacturer won't really be able to undercut them.
The real money is in service - which is why the dealership really showers you with lots of trinkets to keep you coming back to them instead of going to a third party garage.
Of course, the real reason Tesla sells direct is because a lot of the service an ICE-powered car needs goes away in an electric. Think of all the things that get imspected and changed annually like engine oil, coolant (well, you have coolant still for the battery pack, but it doesn't need pumps or anything typically), clutches or transmission fluid, seals, bearings, etc. etc. etc.
Sure, you still have some stuff to change - brakes, brake fluid, wiper fluid, headlights, etc., but the main powertrain has been simplified so much that there's not much that really needs inspection.
So services run cheap and infrequent which will kill any dealership model based on getting you spending several hundred bucks several times a year.
Customer inquiries are customer-initiated cold-calls. They have nothing to do with how happy your employees are.
Exactly. They're entirely related to how well you advertise. Those numbers will fall over time unless he figures out another method of advertising that can keep the numbers up - not likely.
Depends. Customers may be cold calling because of this advertising, and the customers feel that if the employees are happy, they'll produce higher quality work (something customers love).
And you don't always need to advertise to keep the customer base - if you're consistently putting out high-quality work (because your employees are happy and very productive), you get word of mouth advertising. And for some companies, that's all you need because you're completely booked solid for work and the marginal cost of another customer can't justify the expense.
A 95% customer retention rate is basically complete loyalty - the 5% you don't get is churn and the general math of it has to satisfy that 5% would cost an inordinate amount of money. Plus, there are some customers you don't want, period, so losing 1 in 20 isn't a bad thing. Energy should be spent keeping the 19 that return, and not worrying about the 1 that leaves.
Most businesses will kill for a 95% customer retention rate - that's considered top of the game.
I'm not sure I understand the use case here. Is this a multi-player game that they host? If they turn off their game servers, and the game is a multi-player game, then it is essentially dead. (At least for multiplayer). Are you thinking of bnetd here, where you can recreate a multiplayer experience on a local server?
Basically it applies to games where the "developer" part consists of an authentication server (to verify you have a legitimate copy of the game) and/or a matchmaking server (to find opponents), and other than that, no content is required of the server. The exemption is that if the developer stops providing either, you're allowed to hack the game to use your own.
This only applies to games where the developer involvement is limited to authentication and/or matchmaking. If the server part includes content (e.g., MMOs), then it does not apply
So a game that's pretty much self-contained is OK, but not one that requires external content.
To take a real life example - Microsoft killed multiplayer on Halo 2 for the original Xbox and Windows years ago. Under this exemption, it is legal to hack the game (but not the xbox!) to use your own server for authentication and matchmaking. But only for those versions, since the Xbone version is still operational..
This has absolutely NOTHING to do with a "politically correct narrative." This is a bunch of asshole teenagers on the internet being led by a couple basement dwelling 40 year olds who are mad at everyone for no good reason.
It's the dregs of humanity...on the internet...being assholes. Plain and simple.
Not a single "threat" would have been followed through on because these people either never leave their homes, or they're still under their parent's jurisdiction.
Actually, what's sad is after spending YEARS getting folks like Jack Thompson disbarred for being idiotic and telling untruths (games cause violence), it only took a few years afterwards before we're basically proving his point.
Doesn't matter what side you're on, but between this and swatting and other things, the few deluded folks really are in a position to destroy all we've tried to build up. All the public really wants to hear is a bunch of gamers calling in bomb threats, shooting up panels and that stuff before "videogames cause violence" gets irrevocably etched in the public's mind.
All I can see is Jack Thompson starting to collect massive amounts of speaking monies in one big giant "I told you so".
Why not set it up a la carte? See what public services people feel are worth paying their money for? It might actually get more rational public spending by pushing people to think about just where whatever public service they think would be cool and nifty to have will come from, especially since for things like 'community pool' you could have the trigger not be 'majority' but 'sufficient funding.'
Because people are idiots.
I don't pay for firefighting services. My house catches on fire. Firefighters are dispatched, and they protect my neighbour's house because he paid up. I offer to pay, and they refuse. Whose fault is it? Mine, for not paying into the service? The firefighters, for refusing to take my money?
Likewise, if I don't pay for social security, and I don't have savings, that means I'm poor in old age. Which makes it more likely I'll go robbing stores for food or begging on the street. Is that a better outcome for society - to have homeless or higher petty crime just for people who fail to plan?
And that's the real problem - that's why we collectively pay into emergency services - sure it'll be very unlikely to happen to *me*, but you know, I'd rather spend my days and later years in life not worrying about all the old seniors who decided to live it big when they made money and not save up who might come and rob me, or to just be able to go out and enjoy parks without tent cities of same.
Even today, a significant chunk of the population lives paycheck to paycheck - miss one and there's a good chance they'll be out on the street, likely raising the local crime rate all so they could feed their kid (and we all pay for it - increased prices, increased policing/jail/courts/etc). There's a good chunk of people not living
And yes, there's a good chunk of people not paying income taxes - but they're both rich AND poor. But they're paying taxes in other ways - state taxes, sales taxes, etc. They're not getting a free ride.
Black paint absorbs 90-95% of light, the military has Z306 that absorbs 96% of light (and is used for paint as well as coatings for telescopes). NASA has developed materials that absorb 99.95% of light, and Vantablack is 99.965%. The ultimate black is of course, a black hole which absorbs all light (barring quantum phenomena that results in hawking radiation).
The human eye cannot comprehend sucn black - since our black objects all reflect significant amounts of light back. Looking at Vantablack or this, your mind actually sees a hole and doesn't register that there's something there.
Bonus points if your continuous integration build server catches it automatically.
Then have a talk with the author of this non-sense commit about wasting corporate resources.
That's if someone checks in non-building code, which should happen almost never. After all, rarely is it true it builds on one machine and not another if your build environment is properly set up.
This trick is good for someone who can't seem to get their code to compile for no good reason at all.
Anyhow, all you need to do is have your editor go into dumb mode and print non-printing characters as well. Considering most compilers only understand basic ASCII text, when you come across oddball text like unicode or high characters, it should be highlighted.
Of course, I thought the standard editors like vi and emacs do that - they print non-printing characters as control codes...
I think at that point, I'd totally destroy anything I touched, you know, 'accidentally'...
"oops? Well, it's been awhile since I left, and to be honest, you get what you pay for. See ya."
I think you alluded to, but not quite described the REAL reason this clause was dropped.
Not because you accidentally dropped the customer accounts table, but liability. Imagine the bank goes down for a couple of days because of a systems failure. Some people will be upset, and may hire lawyers to sniff around. You think those lawyers will let the fact that non-employees are accessing the bank's systems go unchallenged? For all the lawyers know, they're going to run with the fact that the bank used non-cleared employees who may have caused the issue to worsen. Instead of the bank going down for the day, the bank called in non-employees who had full access to sensitive data, and who very well could've made the problem worse - instead of being able to fix it in a few hours, the non-employees made the bank go down for a couple of days.
You don't need an explicit warranty anywhere with sensible consumer protection laws. The Sale of Goods Act in the UK (and equivalents in most EU countries) allow you to return the goods for a full refund if they do not meet the promises made at time of sale. I had a battery fail in an Apple laptop after four and a half years, but within the number of charge cycles that their ads claimed. They replaced it (couriered out a replacement that arrived at 9am the day after I called them at 3pm - better service than I've ever had from them for anything under warranty) as soon as I mentioned the Sale of Goods Act.
So basically, everywhere with such an act (Europe, Australia) is effectively buying an extended warranty by default.
Instead of say, in North America, where you get what the manufacturer gives, then Best Buy asks if you want to buy an extended warranty for another 15-20%. So instead, goods cost 15-20% more because the extended warranty price is built into the cost of the good.
And you guys still complain you're overpaying for stuff and being scammed. No, you're not - you're paying for taxes built into the price, you're paying for extended warranties, and probably a few other things that people in North America have a choice or option to not buy with the item.
I'm sure ratings played a part but it was still a flagship program and I doubt profitability was the main issue.
I suspect this was just a case of the show being on for a very long time and the two stars having retirement money. At this point they're simply not having fun anymore and want to move onto something new. From the article it sounds like Hyneman wants a job where he just wants to build stuff while Savage wants to do some new TV.
Profitability is probably a huge reason, actually.
After all, if you haven't noticed, the production company is not in the US (it's Australian, I believe), while they have to pay US dollars for Jamie and Adam and the production crew.
And if you haven't noticed, the US dollar is quite strong, which means it costs the production company a lot more Australian dollars to pay for it all.
Kari, Tory and Grant were cut because the company was running out of money. It's likely they're close to running completely out of money because of exchange rate losses.
You have to remember how ratings play into everything. First off, the show ratings are irrelevant. The show exists to sell ads, and the number of eyeballs that see ads is what's important. Those ratings and ad dollars go to Discovery. Discovery reviews the profit they make from each episode from the cost of the episode. If the ratings are high, chances are Discovery will buy more episodes from the production company. There's a per-episode price that the production company charges to supply the content, which is likely set by a contractual agreement, which may been written years ago when the dollar was much weaker.
The production company gets basically a fixed price - it doesn't matter if the episode does well or poorly. And if the production company can't afford to make episodes, they're going to shut down production.
So Discovery may want to buy the next 10 year's worth of Mythbusters, but if the production company doesn't want to, then it won't happen.
Ratings matter very little - the commercial ratings matter to the stations, so that episode you torrented counts for a big fat goose egg as far as they're concerned.
Chances are, Jamie and Adam will be back doing some show or another post-Mythbusters, probably using a US production company. They've actually done about 4 of 5 different series and shows over the years, but they never seemed to work out.
But Google upended advertising by doing less annoying ads than the competition, but targeting them well.
They remain relatively less annoying advertisers I think, but they should definitely lead by example.
Considering Google owns all the other advertisers for the most part, I don't think that's true anymore. They could easily "lead by example" since they do own a good chunk of the companies that pioneered popups, popunders, "rich ads" and other things.
In fact, it seems the amount of people using Google Ads has gone down - perhaps Google is shuffling them to one of their other ad networks because they bring in more money?
1. Remove the flash. 2. Mount it with a non Apple device. 3. Run a dictionary attack on the password.
With the right equipment, it would only take a few hours depending on the complexity of the user's password.
Am I missing something?
Yep. Starting with the iPhone 4, the flash media is encrypted with a key held in the device memory. That key is encrypted with the device UID key, the user's PIN (if enabled), and an instance key. The encryption key is changed when you select "Clear and Delete Everything" (it throws away the key and generates a new one, and re-encrypts it).
Moving the flash chip to a new device means you lack the per-device key which makes the flash inaccessible.
It's a fairly sophisticated system and short of implementation flaws, it's unbreakable.
Hey, as long as we're getting rid of the 1/3 of drivers that are constantly yammering ON their cell phones and even trying to text while driving, I'm all for them giving up their damned cars, and getting out of my way while i"m trying to concentrate on the road and get where I want to in a timely manner.
Lobby for good public transit, like what Europe has. If you've seen the drivers there, you'd think they may be a little bit "crazy" but it seems despite the chaos, things seem to work out.
Because in Europe, you really don't NEED a car - busses and subways get you where you want to go (and really, because of narrow medieval-sized roads, public transit can be faster). Even if you get bored you can take transit to the airport and fly somewhere else cheaply Or take a train elsewhere.
All this means those who don't want to drive don't have to drive.
That's really the problem here - we're forcing those who really don't want to drive to drive, and like all chores, everyone wants to be doing something else. Hence why distracted driving is now topping drunk driving as the leading cause of accidents and injuries.
You don't want some idiot's surname on a species just because he had money considering we'll be stuck with that name for centuries.
If he had sold the name rights for a "limited time" (and slashdotters do love that particular phrase) of say life+100 years, no one would mind. But naming rights for perpetuity is a really bad idea because the public will be stuck using a stupid name that had nothing to do with the characteristics of the insect but rather the greed of the scientist discovering it.
Imagine every newly discovered animal, insect and tree named after a wealthy individual or corp... that's truly disgusting. I would rather the govt reward the scientist for his discovery or at least fund his research somehow.
Uh... you do realize that's how it's done now, right?
I mean, you have insects named after Stephen Colbert, George Bush, Pope John Paul II, Barack Obama, etc.
Not only is this "just deserts", but it's also quite probable. Institutional and architectural information tends to fade quickly, at least for myself. 6 months into a new job and I will only have passing knowledge on the systems. 1 year out and I'm back to almost square one with a weird sense of deja-foo ( on purpose ).
Even worse, in between the time, things change. Just because server Foo handled the security when you were around, doesn't mean Foo is doing it 6 months down the road. So you remember you were toggling security options on Foo, but in reality, it's done by Bar the past 3 months. Just no one's bothered to update Foo and remove the now-unnecessary software.
So now security issue Baz caused by Bar is hanging around because everyone's concentrating on Foo because well, it was Foo. A couple of weeks later, someone asks why you're messing on the wrong server.
And in the meantime, you've reinstalled, you've restored, you've acquired new hardware. All because Foo was the way to do it when you left.
Not only is institutional knowledge fragile temporally, it's fragile in that a snapshot of the way things were 1 month, 2 months, 6 months, a year or more is woefully out of date.
Hell, perhaps you had some server TheMaster doing something vitally important. They decommission TheMaster, and things start failing. A month later of trying to fix the issues they call you back, and you ask about TheMaster, to which no one remembers, and whose remnants are now at the local recyclers.
I really don't see what's the point - the moment you leave, the knowledge you have is outdated and stale. Even if you remember it, there's a very good chance your outdated knowledge will lead you down the wrong rabbit hole. So what might have taken a day to fix had you been around, now costs the bank weeks in down time chasing the wrong lead because someone did a change.
So "I forget" is not only valid, it's a safer answer than "I fixed this before, you do A, B and C".
Slashdot Mirror
And this is a good thing, This is just exactly how science works - people repeatedly testing it and testing it until we finally come up with a theory as to why it works the way it does, and what applecart gets upset because of it.
Perhaps there's some new science out there. Maybe. Or it's something that's just been unaccounted for. Or maybe it's a complete fraud. The best thing is, people are curious and they're trying to find out why. When that answer comes out, it means we've just increased our understanding of the world, which isn't a bad thing.
The reason for this is Nitro compiles Javascript code to native code, something most high end JavaScript engines do these days. But that introduces an obvious security hole, so what Apple did was sandbox Safari even more so Safari can't do things that regular applications can to avoid security issues.
Regular UIWebView applications can't use this because it would be too limiting an environment, so they use a safer interpreter to do it.
The real question becomes - is it a bug in UIWebView, or is it a series of bugs that exploit UIWebView and then Chrome itself, so that any change could easily disrupt the bug?
First of all - people who are like that right now are the homeless beggars you see on the street. So right now, we're not in any good position to say we're superior, because those people cause petty crime to go up, cause us to pay more already in increased food prices (stores have to cover the shrinkage), health care costs (emergency room visits are the most expensive form of medical care available, and people who can't pay - we all pay for their care), as well as many other demonstrated costs of homelessness.
Yes, you'll find a few people "on the dole" with basic income. Which is fine. But you have to realize that living on this gives you the basics only. Maybe you can get cable TV, most likely, it's just OTA. Maybe you can have a cellphone, but it ain't gonna be the latest and greatest smartphone - if you can even get one. Maybe just a basic phone. You aren't going to eat at fancy restaurants, or eat out - you'll afford groceries and have t cook it yourself. Internet? Well, hope you like 1Mbps. A car? Forget it - bike, walk or public transit. A house? You're probably going to be put in a 1-room apartment (probably 200 square feet max), to which you may share a kitchen and a bathroom with other residents. It's basic, it's functional, and livable.
The nice thing is, you an "upgrade" your lifestyle by working. And in basic income, your basic income is simply taxed back so you can earn quite a bit more before the entire amount is clawed back in taxes.
Take on a menial job and you'll probably keep 80% of the basic income, so now you can upgrade your lifestyle. Perhaps you want to move out of that one bedroom apartment and into one where you have your own bathroom and kitchen! (And maybe even laundry!) Or buy a newer computer, or a tablet, or a smartphone. Or simply eat nicer food, or go and eat out.
Face it - living on the dole is possible. But you give up a lot for it. It's almost like a military boot camp - except you can decide you've had enough, get off your ass, and actually upgrade your lifestyle. Far too many people are simply stuck - they have menial jobs that barely pay to live, and yet they can't quit or they'd be on the street. Those jobs are tough, so fat chance of being able to attend school to upgrade yourself to a better job. And welfare often is a disincentive to work since every dollar you make, is a dollar you lose
And given increased automation in our lives, perhaps it's time to realize that most work should be given to the robots to do, but as a society we need to take care of those who now are out of a job, are stuck spending long hours in some other menial job for now, to which they can't upgrade themselves with new skills because of a lack of time.
And you know what? Human nature has it that a lot of people will want to upgrade. Most basic income schemes, when they tried it, actually worked - all the negative livability indicators (homelessness, crime, general decay) went down, the government saves money because it doesn't have to administer a million programs that serves niches, etc.
Android doesn't use BusyBox. Some SoC providers might in their Android BSPs, but it is NOT standard in Android. The reason is the license - BusyBox is GPL, Android prefers Apache, and the only GPL component in it is the Linux kernel.
Android DOES provide an Apache licensed piece of code that works similarly to BusyBox, but it isn't BusyBox. (Many SoC vendors provide BusyBox in theri BSPs because it aids debugging, while the Android native one provides just enough for basic operation).
Otherwise the Busybox team would have their hands full going after all those manufacturers shipping their code without source.
Well, the $180 book was recommended, while the $75 book required "online free supplementary materials".
But from a teaching perspective, probably not. And to be honest, I'd take the $75+online materials over the self-contained $180 version. Because those online materials probably can cover tricky topics another way, so if you don't get something as it was described in the textbook, the online version probably explains it in a different way so you understand it better. Even better, it's an automatic resource those students can use for their other classes!
Incorrect. AOPA wants UAS to follow all the same rules if they want to integrate into the National Airspace System. So if your drone is big enough to fly with regular aircraft, then it should follow the same rules as regular aircraft. Which means if has all the same equipment (radios/transponders/etc) necessary to communicate with ATC and everything.
Drones covers the spectrum from toys to Predator-sized vehicles (which are huge planes - much bigger than your typical Cessna). Even man-carried drones are often quite large and well capably of flying a few thousand feet in the air... right into where airplanes fly.
Your typical DJI like drone will probably not even have to deal with this unless you fly it close to an airport where you have planes at low altitudes. But something like the Google or Amazon drone quite likely has the power and the size to be disruptive.
Easy - easy access to guns.
In other countries, like say, Canada, guns are much harder to get, so you generally get the mentally ill doing oddball things and generally harming only themselves because the only weapon they get access to is a knife, or a stick. Usually also hopped up on some drug or other that you can get easily.
it's a crisis here too, but instead of them shooting everyone up, they get shot at by police.
That said, mental illness is a rather large problem (easily 1 in 3 have some form of it), and many cases aren't entirely visible, leading to families always claiming "he was never violent". And really, even if you tried to prevent it, a reasonably intelligent but mentally ill person would be able to acquire the necessary firepower in the US.
I think that's really the only difference - the reason we don't have mass shootings is because getting a gun is much harder - you either have to illegally obtain them, or if you try legal channels, there are many roadblocks in the way before you're given the gun (i.e., you need a permit).
Which is a good way to do it if you want to audit your friend's book collection or something - just put on a cover and it makes it distinct so when you go to your friend's place, you can ask them about your book.
But to be honest - are you lending books of significant value to you? If so, then maybe keeping track of your stuff is what you need to do, of it's of super value to you, either buy a lending copy, or don't lend out that particular book (if your friends are friends, they will understand if something has significant value to you). If not, well, realize that it's probably gone, buy another copy if you want, and move on. Lend stuff out, you're bound to lose some stuff. Deal with it and move on.
It goes both ways too - your friends lend stuff to you.
Since the urea consumption is proportionate to fuel consumption (about 1:100), the easy solution is to fill both at the pump. I mean, either use a nozzle that will dispense both together or a special filler nozzle. That way the consumer simply dispenses "clean diesel" into their car and everything's taken care of.
No need to remember to fill another tank or anything - you just fill up like you normally do.
Car sales are basically no-profit events to a dealership. They make so little per car (a few hundred bucks) that really, the manufacturer won't really be able to undercut them.
The real money is in service - which is why the dealership really showers you with lots of trinkets to keep you coming back to them instead of going to a third party garage.
Of course, the real reason Tesla sells direct is because a lot of the service an ICE-powered car needs goes away in an electric. Think of all the things that get imspected and changed annually like engine oil, coolant (well, you have coolant still for the battery pack, but it doesn't need pumps or anything typically), clutches or transmission fluid, seals, bearings, etc. etc. etc.
Sure, you still have some stuff to change - brakes, brake fluid, wiper fluid, headlights, etc., but the main powertrain has been simplified so much that there's not much that really needs inspection.
So services run cheap and infrequent which will kill any dealership model based on getting you spending several hundred bucks several times a year.
Depends. Customers may be cold calling because of this advertising, and the customers feel that if the employees are happy, they'll produce higher quality work (something customers love).
And you don't always need to advertise to keep the customer base - if you're consistently putting out high-quality work (because your employees are happy and very productive), you get word of mouth advertising. And for some companies, that's all you need because you're completely booked solid for work and the marginal cost of another customer can't justify the expense.
A 95% customer retention rate is basically complete loyalty - the 5% you don't get is churn and the general math of it has to satisfy that 5% would cost an inordinate amount of money. Plus, there are some customers you don't want, period, so losing 1 in 20 isn't a bad thing. Energy should be spent keeping the 19 that return, and not worrying about the 1 that leaves.
Most businesses will kill for a 95% customer retention rate - that's considered top of the game.
Basically it applies to games where the "developer" part consists of an authentication server (to verify you have a legitimate copy of the game) and/or a matchmaking server (to find opponents), and other than that, no content is required of the server. The exemption is that if the developer stops providing either, you're allowed to hack the game to use your own.
This only applies to games where the developer involvement is limited to authentication and/or matchmaking. If the server part includes content (e.g., MMOs), then it does not apply
So a game that's pretty much self-contained is OK, but not one that requires external content.
To take a real life example - Microsoft killed multiplayer on Halo 2 for the original Xbox and Windows years ago. Under this exemption, it is legal to hack the game (but not the xbox!) to use your own server for authentication and matchmaking. But only for those versions, since the Xbone version is still operational..
Actually, what's sad is after spending YEARS getting folks like Jack Thompson disbarred for being idiotic and telling untruths (games cause violence), it only took a few years afterwards before we're basically proving his point.
Doesn't matter what side you're on, but between this and swatting and other things, the few deluded folks really are in a position to destroy all we've tried to build up. All the public really wants to hear is a bunch of gamers calling in bomb threats, shooting up panels and that stuff before "videogames cause violence" gets irrevocably etched in the public's mind.
All I can see is Jack Thompson starting to collect massive amounts of speaking monies in one big giant "I told you so".
Because people are idiots.
I don't pay for firefighting services. My house catches on fire. Firefighters are dispatched, and they protect my neighbour's house because he paid up. I offer to pay, and they refuse. Whose fault is it? Mine, for not paying into the service? The firefighters, for refusing to take my money?
Likewise, if I don't pay for social security, and I don't have savings, that means I'm poor in old age. Which makes it more likely I'll go robbing stores for food or begging on the street. Is that a better outcome for society - to have homeless or higher petty crime just for people who fail to plan?
And that's the real problem - that's why we collectively pay into emergency services - sure it'll be very unlikely to happen to *me*, but you know, I'd rather spend my days and later years in life not worrying about all the old seniors who decided to live it big when they made money and not save up who might come and rob me, or to just be able to go out and enjoy parks without tent cities of same.
Even today, a significant chunk of the population lives paycheck to paycheck - miss one and there's a good chance they'll be out on the street, likely raising the local crime rate all so they could feed their kid (and we all pay for it - increased prices, increased policing/jail/courts/etc). There's a good chunk of people not living
And yes, there's a good chunk of people not paying income taxes - but they're both rich AND poor. But they're paying taxes in other ways - state taxes, sales taxes, etc. They're not getting a free ride.
Black is an interesting color.
Black paint absorbs 90-95% of light, the military has Z306 that absorbs 96% of light (and is used for paint as well as coatings for telescopes). NASA has developed materials that absorb 99.95% of light, and Vantablack is 99.965%. The ultimate black is of course, a black hole which absorbs all light (barring quantum phenomena that results in hawking radiation).
The human eye cannot comprehend sucn black - since our black objects all reflect significant amounts of light back. Looking at Vantablack or this, your mind actually sees a hole and doesn't register that there's something there.
The American Chemical Society better explains this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
That's if someone checks in non-building code, which should happen almost never. After all, rarely is it true it builds on one machine and not another if your build environment is properly set up.
This trick is good for someone who can't seem to get their code to compile for no good reason at all.
Anyhow, all you need to do is have your editor go into dumb mode and print non-printing characters as well. Considering most compilers only understand basic ASCII text, when you come across oddball text like unicode or high characters, it should be highlighted.
Of course, I thought the standard editors like vi and emacs do that - they print non-printing characters as control codes...
I think you alluded to, but not quite described the REAL reason this clause was dropped.
Not because you accidentally dropped the customer accounts table, but liability. Imagine the bank goes down for a couple of days because of a systems failure. Some people will be upset, and may hire lawyers to sniff around. You think those lawyers will let the fact that non-employees are accessing the bank's systems go unchallenged? For all the lawyers know, they're going to run with the fact that the bank used non-cleared employees who may have caused the issue to worsen. Instead of the bank going down for the day, the bank called in non-employees who had full access to sensitive data, and who very well could've made the problem worse - instead of being able to fix it in a few hours, the non-employees made the bank go down for a couple of days.
I'd say the lawyers would have a field day.
Well, if this is just a one time thing, it's weather.
It'll be climate if the number of hurricanes keeps increasing, or if every year the hurricanes keeps exceeding the previous year's wind record.
One time thing - weather. If it becomes a trend, it's climate.
So basically, everywhere with such an act (Europe, Australia) is effectively buying an extended warranty by default.
Instead of say, in North America, where you get what the manufacturer gives, then Best Buy asks if you want to buy an extended warranty for another 15-20%. So instead, goods cost 15-20% more because the extended warranty price is built into the cost of the good.
And you guys still complain you're overpaying for stuff and being scammed. No, you're not - you're paying for taxes built into the price, you're paying for extended warranties, and probably a few other things that people in North America have a choice or option to not buy with the item.
Profitability is probably a huge reason, actually.
After all, if you haven't noticed, the production company is not in the US (it's Australian, I believe), while they have to pay US dollars for Jamie and Adam and the production crew.
And if you haven't noticed, the US dollar is quite strong, which means it costs the production company a lot more Australian dollars to pay for it all.
Kari, Tory and Grant were cut because the company was running out of money. It's likely they're close to running completely out of money because of exchange rate losses.
You have to remember how ratings play into everything. First off, the show ratings are irrelevant. The show exists to sell ads, and the number of eyeballs that see ads is what's important. Those ratings and ad dollars go to Discovery. Discovery reviews the profit they make from each episode from the cost of the episode. If the ratings are high, chances are Discovery will buy more episodes from the production company. There's a per-episode price that the production company charges to supply the content, which is likely set by a contractual agreement, which may been written years ago when the dollar was much weaker.
The production company gets basically a fixed price - it doesn't matter if the episode does well or poorly. And if the production company can't afford to make episodes, they're going to shut down production.
So Discovery may want to buy the next 10 year's worth of Mythbusters, but if the production company doesn't want to, then it won't happen.
Ratings matter very little - the commercial ratings matter to the stations, so that episode you torrented counts for a big fat goose egg as far as they're concerned.
Chances are, Jamie and Adam will be back doing some show or another post-Mythbusters, probably using a US production company. They've actually done about 4 of 5 different series and shows over the years, but they never seemed to work out.
Considering Google owns all the other advertisers for the most part, I don't think that's true anymore. They could easily "lead by example" since they do own a good chunk of the companies that pioneered popups, popunders, "rich ads" and other things.
In fact, it seems the amount of people using Google Ads has gone down - perhaps Google is shuffling them to one of their other ad networks because they bring in more money?
All Google has to do is... just do it.
Yep. Starting with the iPhone 4, the flash media is encrypted with a key held in the device memory. That key is encrypted with the device UID key, the user's PIN (if enabled), and an instance key. The encryption key is changed when you select "Clear and Delete Everything" (it throws away the key and generates a new one, and re-encrypts it).
Moving the flash chip to a new device means you lack the per-device key which makes the flash inaccessible.
It's a fairly sophisticated system and short of implementation flaws, it's unbreakable.
Lobby for good public transit, like what Europe has. If you've seen the drivers there, you'd think they may be a little bit "crazy" but it seems despite the chaos, things seem to work out.
Because in Europe, you really don't NEED a car - busses and subways get you where you want to go (and really, because of narrow medieval-sized roads, public transit can be faster). Even if you get bored you can take transit to the airport and fly somewhere else cheaply Or take a train elsewhere.
All this means those who don't want to drive don't have to drive.
That's really the problem here - we're forcing those who really don't want to drive to drive, and like all chores, everyone wants to be doing something else. Hence why distracted driving is now topping drunk driving as the leading cause of accidents and injuries.
Uh... you do realize that's how it's done now, right?
I mean, you have insects named after Stephen Colbert, George Bush, Pope John Paul II, Barack Obama, etc.
In fact, Wikipedia has such a list handy!. There's a website tracking this as well.
It's already done right now. Sometimes it's for celebrity status. other times, it's done as an insult to the person.
And sometimes, it's named after the scientist's offspring.
Even worse, in between the time, things change. Just because server Foo handled the security when you were around, doesn't mean Foo is doing it 6 months down the road. So you remember you were toggling security options on Foo, but in reality, it's done by Bar the past 3 months. Just no one's bothered to update Foo and remove the now-unnecessary software.
So now security issue Baz caused by Bar is hanging around because everyone's concentrating on Foo because well, it was Foo. A couple of weeks later, someone asks why you're messing on the wrong server.
And in the meantime, you've reinstalled, you've restored, you've acquired new hardware. All because Foo was the way to do it when you left.
Not only is institutional knowledge fragile temporally, it's fragile in that a snapshot of the way things were 1 month, 2 months, 6 months, a year or more is woefully out of date.
Hell, perhaps you had some server TheMaster doing something vitally important. They decommission TheMaster, and things start failing. A month later of trying to fix the issues they call you back, and you ask about TheMaster, to which no one remembers, and whose remnants are now at the local recyclers.
I really don't see what's the point - the moment you leave, the knowledge you have is outdated and stale. Even if you remember it, there's a very good chance your outdated knowledge will lead you down the wrong rabbit hole. So what might have taken a day to fix had you been around, now costs the bank weeks in down time chasing the wrong lead because someone did a change.
So "I forget" is not only valid, it's a safer answer than "I fixed this before, you do A, B and C".