So... what this study is telling me is that, if I want my phones to be considered reliable, I can just create a mobile operating system that's so confusing and has so many software problems, that any hardware calls I DO get will be dwarfed by the sheer quantity of calls from people stymied by crashing programs and bad interface designs, and will therefore have a lower percentage of hardware-related calls.
I suppose it's too much to ask for something like support calls per thousand units sold, broken down by problem type?
And yes, the actual article uses percent of support calls made as the sole deciding factor to rank which platform is most unreliable. I'm beginning to understand why nobody reads the articles here... you really aren't missing much.
So... what this study is telling me is that, if I want my phones to be considered reliable, I can just create a mobile operating system that's so confusing and has so many software problems, that any hardware calls I DO get will be dwarfed by the sheer quantity of calls from people stymied by crashing programs and bad interface designs, and will therefore have a lower percentage of hardware-related calls.
I suppose it's too much to ask for something like support calls per thousand units sold, broken down by problem type?
Only application that I can figure for this being anywhere remotely useful would be to use vehicles as generators when grid power is out
There was a documentary about this on NHK (Japanese broadcaster)... In the aftermath of the disaster in Japan, some of the victims were using electric cars as portable generators to power chargers for cell phones so that people could call home. There was even some kind of ad hoc relief organization set up around people bringing in EVs from outside in order to do this.
Mitsubishi has also released a device for its iMiev vehicle that allows homes to use power from the car. Nissan's Leaf also got a lot of press coverage because of a similar adapter they were developing (may be out now, I don't remember) - supposedly an electric vehicle at full charge can power a Japanese home for an entire day (including nonessentials like TV). This is also getting a lot of attention due to the power crises in Japan; the car can be used as a power source during peak hours and recharge while off-peak. Not sure how smart that is for battery life, though, nor do I know how they deal with the grid issues you mentioned. I imagine it would be similar to using a home solar panel as a supplemental source, which is becoming more common in Japan. Again, not sure what they do to interface with the grid, but I know they can sell power back to the grid as well as use it for themselves.
Get the Addon Compatibility Reporter. Mozilla recommends it to get around this very problem... I found out about it via their FAQ page. This disables checking for compatibility so you can test the extensions and report to their devs that they are still working (or not).
Randomly saw this article from 2009 a few minutes before seeing this Slashdot story. Seems she had quite the career:
"Gloria Gordon Bolotsky was a gifted mathematician who, after working for the Brooklyn Navy Yard in New York, moved to the University of Pennsylvania for a position at its engineering school. She was chosen for a secret project that would use her skills and moved with the group in 1947 to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland."
Corporation as a construct are intended to behave in psychopathic manors. Most people on the other hands are not psychopaths,
Then that's a problem, because with the economy as it is I don't think we have the resources to design and build psychopathic manors large enough to house each corporation. Plus, the work required to ensure that each manor was sufficiently psychopathic... nevermind the environmental impact statements...
In his theory, gravity exists because of a difference in concentration of information in the empty space between two masses and its surroundings.
So... information wants to be free?
Yeah, he's just not getting it. Somebody queue the car analogies.
My post was funny, but it was intended half-seriously. The summary seemed to be stating that the difference in information concentration was responsible for gravity, which created an odd word-picture in my mind... almost as if information was being held under "pressure" that was contrasting against the vacuum of space, and it wanted out, and so the fleeing information from two objects brought them together.
...on second thought, yeah, why don't you go ahead and bring out the car analogies...
That which you quoted is section 2b. This was *already* given to them by the original order as signed by Ronald Reagan. Obama isn't granting them the rights under 2b, because Interpol already had them all along and nobody noticed.
Please see the original order: Executive Order 12425. Notice that 2b is not listed in the "exceptions", meaning that they have the rights under 2b.
If it's supposed to be serious, you have to amortize the weight of the equipment over its uses. A desktop that spends half its use playing solitaire, 1/4 of its use surfing the web, and 1/4 of its use spamming the world under viral control only counts for half.
If you're weighing traffic, sure. I figured they were weighing connectivity - an analogous question might be, "how much does your corporate network weigh?" Being part of a network doesn't require actually using it
Of course, you'd still have to decide whether/how to amortize time spent off the network (e.g. computer is off, phone is outside of data plan area, etc).
Anecdotally, it seems to be blocked for some people and not for others, and the blocking itself seems to be in flux. The last time I saw a post on Slashdot saying it had been closed, I tried accessing it then and could not. This time around, I can access the website. Don't know about the torrent though, haven't tried.
Meant to say *tracker* - heh. Maybe I shouldn't slashdot without my green tea:)
Anecdotally, it seems to be blocked for some people and not for others, and the blocking itself seems to be in flux. The last time I saw a post on Slashdot saying it had been closed, I tried accessing it then and could not. This time around, I can access the website. Don't know about the torrent though, haven't tried.
The fact that so many people chime in with "I don't get it" is probably an indication of how revolutionary it is.
...or of it just being poorly articulated.
I'm not a Wave hater, but a lot of the coverage I read initially was really vague about what it actually is. Even after the.com bubble, it seems a lot of people are willing to make the assumption that vague vibes of goodness and a lack of details makes for something revolutionary - if it can't be explained well, then it must be cool.
In this case though it turns out Wave actually is cool. It just needs to be explained better, and we're beginning to see some of that implementation now.
Great... turn my back on that crazy cat for just a minute and he's already posting AC on Slashdot. Next thing we know it'll be first meows and Soviet Veterinarian jokes.
Compared to? Cats? An alien race you know of but the rest of us don't? A cherrypicked group of humans?
Just try getting between a cat and a plate of tuna. They are fiendishly inventive... I have a cat that, while not necessarily socially intelligent, was quite clever at solving problems. He might fit in here at Slashdot;) - One day when I was in my last year of high school, the cat, while wondering why in the world he was not getting petted and catered to, decided it was time to take matters into his own paws. Having carefully observed me using the computer over a long period of time, he figured out how to reset my computer - never mind the fact that the front panel had been completely removed and the reset "switch" consisted of a button deeply recessed into a 7mm opening in the grating, of which there were dozens to choose from. He had to stick his claw in that specific hole, and *bam* - there goes an hour of work. He seemed to think that without that pesky English paper on my screen, I'd have more time to pay attention to him. He got a lot more attention than he bargained for that day...
However, suppose we were to assume a 25 mile radius, instead...given that 40/45 seems optimistic, as you noted. 1,963.49541 sq. miles, divided into America's size would give us 1,932.3 towers needed to blanket the nation, at 0.0005% coverage per tower, ignoring overlap and ignoring existing towers. Of which, the executive contribution would cover 15.360% of the nation.
gahhhh it's 0.05% coverage per tower, not 0.0005%. Got mixed up between percent and decimal...these errors are infectious!
Eh... the 1/10 of 1 percent figure applies only to one tower. Your guesstimate has the number of towers being almost 300. So actually, 0.167656546 % coverage per tower (we're not counting for the inevitable overlap between towers) * 296 towers = 49.6263 % - almost half of the nation. We're also ignoring the already existing towers, of course, but these would be a welcome supplement in any case.
However, suppose we were to assume a 25 mile radius, instead...given that 40/45 seems optimistic, as you noted. 1,963.49541 sq. miles, divided into America's size would give us 1,932.3 towers needed to blanket the nation, at 0.0005% coverage per tower, ignoring overlap and ignoring existing towers. Of which, the executive contribution would cover 15.360% of the nation.
Sorry for OT. I wanted to send a private message but I couldn't find out how to do that on Slashdot.
Plastbox, your website is spewing out errors as fast as available bandwidth will let it, and I don't think you want to get billed for all that bandwidth. Here's a sample:
.
Warning: fsockopen() [function.fsockopen]: unable to connect to 81.191.94.248:10000 (Connection refused) in/var/www/org/plastbox/root/index.php on line 24
Warning: fwrite(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in/var/www/org/plastbox/root/index.php on line 25
Warning: feof(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in/var/www/org/plastbox/root/index.php on line 26
Warning: fread(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in/var/www/org/plastbox/root/index.php on line 28
Warning: feof(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in/var/www/org/plastbox/root/index.php on line 26...ad infinitum
Just read about it in the newspaper. (Daily Yomiuri, for me.)
Unfortunately, the on-line version leaves off a few things.
For instance, Kaneko's lawyer's pointed out that auto manufacturers would not "be punished if speeding became rampant." (Reported in the print news.)
Also, the on-line version doesn't mention that, "A revised Copyright Law that prohibits users from downloading such peer-to-peer file sharing software will come into force in January." (The last line of the print article.)
I think the print version of the Yomiuri may have been slightly off on that point... the sources I have seem to say the law is dealing with copyrighted works, not programs that can be used to download them.
Copyright act amended
Japan Strengthens Copyright Law
Basically, the new legal ground seems to be that downloading works protected by copyright without permission is now officially a crime, but they have to prove the defendent knew the file was not distributed legally. Up until now, prosecution has been mostly (if not completely?) uploaders. Nothing is being said about downloading the software itself.
If you want it from the original source, and you can read Japanese, this link has the text of the bill itself in PDF format. I have not translated it so I can't verify whether the English news sources are correct in their interpretation or not.
Here it is...there doesn't seem to be a gunshot or a blood splatter though.
...and here's a rough translation. IANFIJ (I am not fluent in Japanese). Furthermore, it seems Slashdot is going to mangle the Japanese transcript. Also, I'm skipping the last screen at the end.
/ / In a theater, taking pictures of or recording a movie is a crime.
/ / By law, jail time of up to ten years, fines of up to 10,000,000 yen ($113,050), or both are handed down.
/ / / If you see suspicious behavior, please notify the theater staff. [We will] report to the police immediately.
NO / MORE / No more movie piracy.
Did you even read my post? Specifically, did you read the following?
* I'm not claiming I know which research is closer to the truth. It could be this year's, it could be last year's. The date isn't going to tell us.
They both claim reliance on MODIS data and reach opposite conclusions. So... what gives?
To be honest, it sounds like you skimmed what I wrote and decided I was a global warming nut. If you enjoy arguing against them, then by all means have fun pretending that I am one. By all means, tell me what "my attitude" is - I'm sure it'd be news to me, since I never expressed an opinion about what should receive funding and what should not. But I digress...
My main point isn't about which one's right or wrong - frankly I don't know or care. It's about the rules of logic. You're saying the other research is "a little old" when it's only one year older than the link you cited. It matters little which side a person is on - what matters is that they follow the rules of logic and provide a refutation that goes beyond "it's [one year] old." They both use the same MODIS data and reach different conclusions - that points to a difference that cannot be explained by one being a year older than the other. There must be different methodologies, and one has to decide which one is closer to the truth. I would like to know what the difference in how they assess the MODIS data is - unfortunately, I can't know, because I don't have access to anything beyond the abstract of the research you cited. The full papers seem to require paying for access.
Not having access to anything but the abstracts, I have to ask...
What does a one year difference in date have anything to do with reaching drastically different claims using the same data source? According to GP, in 2008, MODIS data was inconsistent with cosmic rays causing cloud formation. According to your "newer research" in 2009, MODIS data magically became consistent with the theory. They both claim reliance on MODIS data and reach opposite conclusions. So... what gives? Either they played with the data selection process or they had different criteria for deciding what's a correlation and what's not. That doesn't sound like being "out of date" to me...that sounds more like having different presuppositions and methodologies going in. A one year difference isn't enough to wave the wand and make all prior research go away - you've got to demonstrate that either the methodology or the data of the old research was flawed.
* I'm not claiming I know which research is closer to the truth. It could be this year's, it could be last year's. The date isn't going to tell us.
Slashdot Mirror
So... what this study is telling me is that, if I want my phones to be considered reliable, I can just create a mobile operating system that's so confusing and has so many software problems, that any hardware calls I DO get will be dwarfed by the sheer quantity of calls from people stymied by crashing programs and bad interface designs, and will therefore have a lower percentage of hardware-related calls. I suppose it's too much to ask for something like support calls per thousand units sold, broken down by problem type?
And yes, the actual article uses percent of support calls made as the sole deciding factor to rank which platform is most unreliable. I'm beginning to understand why nobody reads the articles here... you really aren't missing much.
So... what this study is telling me is that, if I want my phones to be considered reliable, I can just create a mobile operating system that's so confusing and has so many software problems, that any hardware calls I DO get will be dwarfed by the sheer quantity of calls from people stymied by crashing programs and bad interface designs, and will therefore have a lower percentage of hardware-related calls.
I suppose it's too much to ask for something like support calls per thousand units sold, broken down by problem type?
Only application that I can figure for this being anywhere remotely useful would be to use vehicles as generators when grid power is out
There was a documentary about this on NHK (Japanese broadcaster)... In the aftermath of the disaster in Japan, some of the victims were using electric cars as portable generators to power chargers for cell phones so that people could call home. There was even some kind of ad hoc relief organization set up around people bringing in EVs from outside in order to do this.
Mitsubishi has also released a device for its iMiev vehicle that allows homes to use power from the car. Nissan's Leaf also got a lot of press coverage because of a similar adapter they were developing (may be out now, I don't remember) - supposedly an electric vehicle at full charge can power a Japanese home for an entire day (including nonessentials like TV). This is also getting a lot of attention due to the power crises in Japan; the car can be used as a power source during peak hours and recharge while off-peak. Not sure how smart that is for battery life, though, nor do I know how they deal with the grid issues you mentioned. I imagine it would be similar to using a home solar panel as a supplemental source, which is becoming more common in Japan. Again, not sure what they do to interface with the grid, but I know they can sell power back to the grid as well as use it for themselves.
-- Joren
Get the Addon Compatibility Reporter. Mozilla recommends it to get around this very problem... I found out about it via their FAQ page. This disables checking for compatibility so you can test the extensions and report to their devs that they are still working (or not).
Randomly saw this article from 2009 a few minutes before seeing this Slashdot story. Seems she had quite the career:
"Gloria Gordon Bolotsky was a gifted mathematician who, after working for the Brooklyn Navy Yard in New York, moved to the University of Pennsylvania for a position at its engineering school. She was chosen for a secret project that would use her skills and moved with the group in 1947 to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland."
Because everybody is a corporation?(!)
Corporation as a construct are intended to behave in psychopathic manors. Most people on the other hands are not psychopaths,
Then that's a problem, because with the economy as it is I don't think we have the resources to design and build psychopathic manors large enough to house each corporation. Plus, the work required to ensure that each manor was sufficiently psychopathic... nevermind the environmental impact statements...
It didn't originally; now it does. The typo stuck around longer in the RSS feed than it did on the main site.
He's talking about Tiger Woods. Reading the news doesn't hurt
Ok, I guess I must have missed the headline where Tiger Woods had formed his own government.
So... information wants to be free?
Yeah, he's just not getting it. Somebody queue the car analogies.
My post was funny, but it was intended half-seriously. The summary seemed to be stating that the difference in information concentration was responsible for gravity, which created an odd word-picture in my mind... almost as if information was being held under "pressure" that was contrasting against the vacuum of space, and it wanted out, and so the fleeing information from two objects brought them together.
...on second thought, yeah, why don't you go ahead and bring out the car analogies...
So... information wants to be free?
That which you quoted is section 2b. This was *already* given to them by the original order as signed by Ronald Reagan. Obama isn't granting them the rights under 2b, because Interpol already had them all along and nobody noticed. Please see the original order: Executive Order 12425. Notice that 2b is not listed in the "exceptions", meaning that they have the rights under 2b.
Why isn't this in idle?
If it's supposed to be serious, you have to amortize the weight of the equipment over its uses. A desktop that spends half its use playing solitaire, 1/4 of its use surfing the web, and 1/4 of its use spamming the world under viral control only counts for half.
If you're weighing traffic, sure. I figured they were weighing connectivity - an analogous question might be, "how much does your corporate network weigh?" Being part of a network doesn't require actually using it
Of course, you'd still have to decide whether/how to amortize time spent off the network (e.g. computer is off, phone is outside of data plan area, etc).
Anecdotally, it seems to be blocked for some people and not for others, and the blocking itself seems to be in flux. The last time I saw a post on Slashdot saying it had been closed, I tried accessing it then and could not. This time around, I can access the website. Don't know about the torrent though, haven't tried.
Meant to say *tracker* - heh. Maybe I shouldn't slashdot without my green tea :)
Anecdotally, it seems to be blocked for some people and not for others, and the blocking itself seems to be in flux. The last time I saw a post on Slashdot saying it had been closed, I tried accessing it then and could not. This time around, I can access the website. Don't know about the torrent though, haven't tried.
The fact that so many people chime in with "I don't get it" is probably an indication of how revolutionary it is.
...or of it just being poorly articulated.
.com bubble, it seems a lot of people are willing to make the assumption that vague vibes of goodness and a lack of details makes for something revolutionary - if it can't be explained well, then it must be cool.
I'm not a Wave hater, but a lot of the coverage I read initially was really vague about what it actually is. Even after the
In this case though it turns out Wave actually is cool. It just needs to be explained better, and we're beginning to see some of that implementation now.
Great... turn my back on that crazy cat for just a minute and he's already posting AC on Slashdot. Next thing we know it'll be first meows and Soviet Veterinarian jokes.
Unfortunately, humans are quite stupid.
Compared to? Cats? An alien race you know of but the rest of us don't? A cherrypicked group of humans?
Just try getting between a cat and a plate of tuna. They are fiendishly inventive... I have a cat that, while not necessarily socially intelligent, was quite clever at solving problems. He might fit in here at Slashdot ;) - One day when I was in my last year of high school, the cat, while wondering why in the world he was not getting petted and catered to, decided it was time to take matters into his own paws. Having carefully observed me using the computer over a long period of time, he figured out how to reset my computer - never mind the fact that the front panel had been completely removed and the reset "switch" consisted of a button deeply recessed into a 7mm opening in the grating, of which there were dozens to choose from. He had to stick his claw in that specific hole, and *bam* - there goes an hour of work. He seemed to think that without that pesky English paper on my screen, I'd have more time to pay attention to him. He got a lot more attention than he bargained for that day...
However, suppose we were to assume a 25 mile radius, instead...given that 40/45 seems optimistic, as you noted. 1,963.49541 sq. miles, divided into America's size would give us 1,932.3 towers needed to blanket the nation, at 0.0005% coverage per tower, ignoring overlap and ignoring existing towers. Of which, the executive contribution would cover 15.360% of the nation.
gahhhh it's 0.05% coverage per tower, not 0.0005%. Got mixed up between percent and decimal...these errors are infectious!
Eh... the 1/10 of 1 percent figure applies only to one tower. Your guesstimate has the number of towers being almost 300. So actually, 0.167656546 % coverage per tower (we're not counting for the inevitable overlap between towers) * 296 towers = 49.6263 % - almost half of the nation. We're also ignoring the already existing towers, of course, but these would be a welcome supplement in any case.
However, suppose we were to assume a 25 mile radius, instead...given that 40/45 seems optimistic, as you noted. 1,963.49541 sq. miles, divided into America's size would give us 1,932.3 towers needed to blanket the nation, at 0.0005% coverage per tower, ignoring overlap and ignoring existing towers. Of which, the executive contribution would cover 15.360% of the nation.
Plastbox, your website is spewing out errors as fast as available bandwidth will let it, and I don't think you want to get billed for all that bandwidth. Here's a sample:
.
Just read about it in the newspaper. (Daily Yomiuri, for me.)
Unfortunately, the on-line version leaves off a few things.
For instance, Kaneko's lawyer's pointed out that auto manufacturers would not "be punished if speeding became rampant." (Reported in the print news.)
Also, the on-line version doesn't mention that, "A revised Copyright Law that prohibits users from downloading such peer-to-peer file sharing software will come into force in January." (The last line of the print article.)
I think the print version of the Yomiuri may have been slightly off on that point... the sources I have seem to say the law is dealing with copyrighted works, not programs that can be used to download them. Copyright act amended
Japan Strengthens Copyright Law Basically, the new legal ground seems to be that downloading works protected by copyright without permission is now officially a crime, but they have to prove the defendent knew the file was not distributed legally. Up until now, prosecution has been mostly (if not completely?) uploaders. Nothing is being said about downloading the software itself.
If you want it from the original source, and you can read Japanese, this link has the text of the bill itself in PDF format. I have not translated it so I can't verify whether the English news sources are correct in their interpretation or not.
Here it is ...there doesn't seem to be a gunshot or a blood splatter though.
...and here's a rough translation. IANFIJ (I am not fluent in Japanese). Furthermore, it seems Slashdot is going to mangle the Japanese transcript. Also, I'm skipping the last screen at the end.
/ /
In a theater, taking pictures of or recording a movie is a crime.
/ /
By law, jail time of up to ten years, fines of up to 10,000,000 yen ($113,050), or both are handed down.
/ / /
If you see suspicious behavior, please notify the theater staff. [We will] report to the police immediately.
NO / MORE /
No more movie piracy.
Here it is
...there doesn't seem to be a gunshot or a blood splatter though.
* I'm not claiming I know which research is closer to the truth. It could be this year's, it could be last year's. The date isn't going to tell us.
They both claim reliance on MODIS data and reach opposite conclusions. So... what gives?
To be honest, it sounds like you skimmed what I wrote and decided I was a global warming nut. If you enjoy arguing against them, then by all means have fun pretending that I am one. By all means, tell me what "my attitude" is - I'm sure it'd be news to me, since I never expressed an opinion about what should receive funding and what should not. But I digress...
My main point isn't about which one's right or wrong - frankly I don't know or care. It's about the rules of logic. You're saying the other research is "a little old" when it's only one year older than the link you cited. It matters little which side a person is on - what matters is that they follow the rules of logic and provide a refutation that goes beyond "it's [one year] old." They both use the same MODIS data and reach different conclusions - that points to a difference that cannot be explained by one being a year older than the other. There must be different methodologies, and one has to decide which one is closer to the truth. I would like to know what the difference in how they assess the MODIS data is - unfortunately, I can't know, because I don't have access to anything beyond the abstract of the research you cited. The full papers seem to require paying for access.
Not having access to anything but the abstracts, I have to ask...
What does a one year difference in date have anything to do with reaching drastically different claims using the same data source? According to GP, in 2008, MODIS data was inconsistent with cosmic rays causing cloud formation. According to your "newer research" in 2009, MODIS data magically became consistent with the theory. They both claim reliance on MODIS data and reach opposite conclusions. So... what gives? Either they played with the data selection process or they had different criteria for deciding what's a correlation and what's not. That doesn't sound like being "out of date" to me...that sounds more like having different presuppositions and methodologies going in. A one year difference isn't enough to wave the wand and make all prior research go away - you've got to demonstrate that either the methodology or the data of the old research was flawed.
* I'm not claiming I know which research is closer to the truth. It could be this year's, it could be last year's. The date isn't going to tell us.