I think you might have summed up the real issue in the part "Hours later(!)"... I understand mistakes, I've made my share of real doozies... but what's the first thing you do after changing a system? TEST. Sure sometimes you don't manage to test every conceivable way something works, but even the simplest test will notice a complete failure like this (every time I touch my spam rules the first thing I do is send myself an email to make sure it still gets through) So while I unfortunately understand a short outage of this nature. The length of it indicates a lack of any testing after a change, which I'm less forgiving of.
I don't believe 911 was affected, though many other government services were affected, including all registry services, and all electronic health records in the hospitals. To be fair, I'm not sure how much blame Shaw has in that one, The government contracted IBM (I think) to do the data centre, and IBM (if that's who it was) hosted it in the Shaw building, Without knowing the contracts involved, it's equally likely that this was a government screw up, an IBM screw up, or a Shaw screw up. Ok, the amount of damage from the fire itself seems excessive, indicating a poorly designed data centre, which was Shaw's fault. But I honestly put the lack of any redundant systems for such critical infrastructure down as a government screw up, as it is likely their contract that specified only a single data centre. (for such mission critical stuff, I can't figure why they wouldn't have a minimum of two completely redundant systems in two different cities running with live fail-over capabilities. There's no reason that outage should have lasted more than a minute or two, let alone the week plus that it did.)
Baking in Imperial measurments drives me nuts. All the ingredients come in metric pacakages, so I have to convert and try to figure out how many Oz are in a 750ml container of something, or how many grams of something I need to make a pound. So much easier to bake in metric. Also much easier to do math without thinking. I can never remember how many Oz in a Qt or tsp in a Tbsp, or Tbsp in a Cup. But I do know that if I want to make a half recipe, and the original calls for a 25ml measure than I need 12.5ml but if I need half a tbsp? how many tsp is that?
The only things that are easier in imperial are things where someone has refused to sell items in metric, so for the moment the only example I can think of is building supplies. I'd love to buy drywall or plywood in metric, but they still come in 4'x8' sizes.
Of course there is one thing worse than imperial measurments, and that's poorly done metric conversions. I was in a class once where the original material was in imperial, but had been metricized. There were constant silly examples, but one that sticks in my mind was talking about a distance to place something to be conveniently operated from a specific location, the answer was "approximately 306mm" (originally obviously about a foot) had they said "30cm" or even "300mm" it would have been quite sufficient for the prupose, but they had to make it exact for who knows what reason. The text was full of such examples. The problem wasn't using metric, the problem was how they had converted.
Unfortunately, yes, other people did the same thing you did. (Canadian here) Personally I think everyone should just move to UTC and move in to the 20th (let alone 21st) century. But at least removing DST would be a small step in the right direction (and it doesn't matter if it's permanently "on" or "off" it's the same either way)
What Spammer sends anything from their own machines? When you're sending from a botnet of millions, what real effect will chewing up someone else's CPU cycles have?
You completely ignored the fact that all the Android phones with MHL connectors aren't more expensive than the iphone.
Also some Andoid devices don't have MHL because they have HDMI ports (for example the Acer Iconia tablet, and the Motorola Milestone 3 among several others)
Some devices have decided video output isn't important at all. but I can't think of any that have video output at a steeper price than the iPhone which you state is "saving money" by not including a feature many cheaper devices include.
I don't think you grasp the actual advantage to lightning. It has one HUGE advantage that no other cable would provide. It forces vendor lock-in while at the same time instanly obsoleting all previous Apple cables. It's a marketing dream! (nightmare for users, but since when has Apple ever cared about them?)
So that's why all the android devices with MHL outputs are so much more expensive than the iPhone? oh wait... they aren't. I don't care where they put the chips, the end result is cheaper for the end user, and works more smoothly.
Also I can have a cable at every TV in my house, one on my desk at work, and one in my bag, and I didn't have to pay a fortune for each one.
Sandpaper will never give the same even finish that a proper matte screen gives, and will likely decrease the "crispness" (discussed earlier) in a very real way. I don't need to make it any harder to see the screen...
That depends, your power bill won't like you, and it may reduce the life of the backlight. Additionally some brands (though not all) also put advertising overlays on their "store" mode (and annoyingly, it is often very difficult to find a way to switch to "home" mode if someone chose the wrong option when they first plugged it in)
That is in fact one of the examples I used in my original post (I said inflatable as opposed to liquid filled, but that is the technology I was referring to.) And yes, I'm sure that a proper implementation is still a ways off. For one thing, as far as I can tell, this is still a touch screen with raised portions, which means that sliding your finger over the buttons to find the right one still means hitting every key on the way (as opposed to physical devices where you can slide your way to the third button over and then press it in) additionally, they still haven't found a way to do knobs or sliders. I believe this is a step in the right direction, but not "there" yet.
As for 60 years away... that depends. People are historically AWFUL at predicting the future. To look at TNG examples, we've already pretty much surpassed the PADD tablets they used, and the phones in our pockets in many ways do a lot more than their communicators. At the time it originally aired I remember thinking how amazing it would be to have a computer like the one on the Enterprise that had the entire knowledge of mankind at your fingertips. Now I carry one in my pocket. But of course there are other parts to their technology. Replicators are both on the verge of becoming reality (3D printers) and impossibly far off (ordering a full meal and having it appear in seconds) Transporters are a ways away yet (probably more than 60 years) and warp drive... well our best understanding right now can't even come up with a way it would be physically possible even disregarding technological limitations. (I'm an optimist though, so I will not go so far as to say that it is impossible, only that a way to do so is as of yet undiscovered) Interestingly enough though, perhaps the one part of Star Trek that I actually find the most believable though is the societal story it tells, of a post scarcity society without money and with endless opportunities. I think that it is true that we will get to that point, I also think we will go through some very dark times to get there, so several hundred years away may be pretty accurate for that part. (And Star Trek does in fact talk about those dark times as well, as much as we nerds love the tech, it is at it's core a story about humanity more than about technology)
Or we could save the money on that product which is bound to be a huge cost sink and just use existing matte technologies....
In fact such a technology exists on almost all modern TVs. they have a "store mode" and a "home mode" the difference is the store mode runs at max brightness at all times so as to wash out the glare. Often times the "home mode" isn't even capable of getting to the same brightness because they would never get energy star certification if it did. (have you ever wondered why electronics ask you when you first set them up if you are a store or not?)
I don't buy that "crispness" argument for a second. I have 3 matte screens in front of me at home, and the picture is plenty crisp. I can also see what I'm doing even with the lights on. There is absolutely no excuse for shiny screens. I've never talked to anybody who prefers them, but marketing departments obviously do...
But that is exactly the point. watching someone move a mouse around is boring, if you want it to be interesting in a movie you need to exaggerate the gestures. Little things don't show well on screen, so they get made big. For film this is good. The problem isn't that these are bad movie interfaces, they're actually very good for movies. The problem only comes when someone watches the movie and then decides they should cripple the rest of the world with the same interface because it looks neat.
I gave up. I really didn't want a phone without a physical keyboard. but at the same time, I did want a modern phone, and the manufacturers refuse to sell anything where I am that qualifies as both. The only phones I can find with physical keyboards are a minimum of about 3 generations behind the current phones. So I compromised and gave up on a physical keyboard. Unfortunately I'm now "proof" to these idiot companies that people "want" phones without keyboards, when in fact I'm the opposite, there just wasn't an option there that fit.
The biggest problem as I see it is that you can't feel the controls. Like all the interfaces in ST:TNG, there is too much dependence on having to look where your hands are. I think that's a distraction at a very basic level that we haven't fully noticed yet, let alone dealt with in any meaningful way.
Think of your old-school cell phone. You could make a call, even text, without looking at it. (Or, I could. Your mileage may vary, I guess.) Can you do that with your glass-smooth smartphone now?
Unfortunately physical buttons are expensive, especially on a device that really needs a touch screen for some things anyway. I clung to my slide out qwerty keyboard for as long as I could, but had to eventually get a touchscreen because that's all the manufacturers want to make. The good news is that it's not a problem that people don't know about. And in fact several companies have come up with various technologies to try to make a touchscreen tactile (I saw one idea that was basically inflatable bubbles under the surface of the screen that could inflate buttons as needed, I believe it was blackberry who a while ago made their whole screen push in like a button when you clicked on it, and of course almost every phone these days has haptic feedback (which I usually turn off as soon as I can)). Unfortunately none of these have worked well yet, but give it some time and we may get there yet.
I do find it interesting that you mention ST:TNG, from what I understand the theory behind their LCARS "touchscreens" was that it actually was tactile, just using a technology that we don't yet have (and that obviously wasn't so visible on screen) with the idea that you could actually have the best of both worlds. A shared console that each user could easily re-arrange for their particular preference, or current task, while still retaining the feel of real buttons. At the moment the idea sounds really appealing, but it's a ways off in implementation yet.
how often do you see a cell phone, tablet, or even laptop with a matte screen? They're almost all high glare nightmares. The makers have ignored the best way of reducing glare because a shiny screen looks better, and therefore sells better, right up until the point where you try to actually use the thing. The only way around it is to crank up the brightness to try to overcome the glare, kills battery life, but it's worth it for a shiny screen when it's off right????
if you take it to the police, even if your particular department is useless on these sorts of issues, they will at least file a report. They many not do anything at all with it after they file it. But at least it's on record. Now this doesn't help with the immediate problem, but if the crooks are successful in working their way past some logins and to a point where they have actually got access to something important (like a bank account, or heaven forbid enough information to get ID issued in your name) then when you go to clean up the mess, you have a paper trail saying things are happening. makes it more likely they'll believe you at that point.
You missed the third, and most likely option. The car failed in a way that could have been controlled had the driver been capable and competent. But which this driver failed to control and instead blamed on multiple systems failing instead of just one.
I'm not saying the car didn't experience a failure, it's likely that it did. I'm just saying the most likely case is that the human didn't handle said failure in an ideal way.
Sadly, even if the US had complex testing to get a license, you're only tested once, when you first get your license. Then again (written) at 65. People memorize enough of the handbook to pass the test, and then forget all of it. The driving test is even more of a joke. There's almost zero test of car operations and control -- stop/start, gear selection, and keep it between the lines. 3 point turn? I don't think they do that anymore. Parallel parking? no longer taught or tested. (not that I've seen any parallel parking in decades.)
These are three systems; they're all controlled by one computer system. (abs is completely independent system. that's not really going to help here, unless you have a diag system attached... even then those programs are for bleeding air from the abs, not controlled braking.)
Except that they aren't really all controlled by 1 computer. The brakes are still a manual system. There aren't any cars built with entirely "brake by wire" and tests have shown that even the most powerful cars have brakes that will overpower the engine and bring you to a stop. There has also never been a properly documented case of a car refusing to turn off when properly requested. As for the engineer, he's essentially irrelevant as he wasn't in the car, and if you've ever done any tech support for anyone over the phone you know how likely it is that they did everything exactly the way you asked them to.
Slashdot Mirror
luckily the law in Canada caps the maximum penalty for all past offences of private copyright infringement at $5000 total. so "bankrupt" is unlikely.
I think you might have summed up the real issue in the part "Hours later(!)" ... I understand mistakes, I've made my share of real doozies... but what's the first thing you do after changing a system? TEST. Sure sometimes you don't manage to test every conceivable way something works, but even the simplest test will notice a complete failure like this (every time I touch my spam rules the first thing I do is send myself an email to make sure it still gets through)
So while I unfortunately understand a short outage of this nature. The length of it indicates a lack of any testing after a change, which I'm less forgiving of.
I don't believe 911 was affected, though many other government services were affected, including all registry services, and all electronic health records in the hospitals. To be fair, I'm not sure how much blame Shaw has in that one, The government contracted IBM (I think) to do the data centre, and IBM (if that's who it was) hosted it in the Shaw building, Without knowing the contracts involved, it's equally likely that this was a government screw up, an IBM screw up, or a Shaw screw up. Ok, the amount of damage from the fire itself seems excessive, indicating a poorly designed data centre, which was Shaw's fault. But I honestly put the lack of any redundant systems for such critical infrastructure down as a government screw up, as it is likely their contract that specified only a single data centre. (for such mission critical stuff, I can't figure why they wouldn't have a minimum of two completely redundant systems in two different cities running with live fail-over capabilities. There's no reason that outage should have lasted more than a minute or two, let alone the week plus that it did.)
Baking in Imperial measurments drives me nuts. All the ingredients come in metric pacakages, so I have to convert and try to figure out how many Oz are in a 750ml container of something, or how many grams of something I need to make a pound. So much easier to bake in metric. Also much easier to do math without thinking. I can never remember how many Oz in a Qt or tsp in a Tbsp, or Tbsp in a Cup. But I do know that if I want to make a half recipe, and the original calls for a 25ml measure than I need 12.5ml but if I need half a tbsp? how many tsp is that?
The only things that are easier in imperial are things where someone has refused to sell items in metric, so for the moment the only example I can think of is building supplies. I'd love to buy drywall or plywood in metric, but they still come in 4'x8' sizes.
Of course there is one thing worse than imperial measurments, and that's poorly done metric conversions. I was in a class once where the original material was in imperial, but had been metricized. There were constant silly examples, but one that sticks in my mind was talking about a distance to place something to be conveniently operated from a specific location, the answer was "approximately 306mm" (originally obviously about a foot) had they said "30cm" or even "300mm" it would have been quite sufficient for the prupose, but they had to make it exact for who knows what reason. The text was full of such examples. The problem wasn't using metric, the problem was how they had converted.
Unfortunately, yes, other people did the same thing you did. (Canadian here)
Personally I think everyone should just move to UTC and move in to the 20th (let alone 21st) century. But at least removing DST would be a small step in the right direction (and it doesn't matter if it's permanently "on" or "off" it's the same either way)
What Spammer sends anything from their own machines? When you're sending from a botnet of millions, what real effect will chewing up someone else's CPU cycles have?
You completely ignored the fact that all the Android phones with MHL connectors aren't more expensive than the iphone.
Also some Andoid devices don't have MHL because they have HDMI ports (for example the Acer Iconia tablet, and the Motorola Milestone 3 among several others)
Some devices have decided video output isn't important at all. but I can't think of any that have video output at a steeper price than the iPhone which you state is "saving money" by not including a feature many cheaper devices include.
I don't think you grasp the actual advantage to lightning. It has one HUGE advantage that no other cable would provide. It forces vendor lock-in while at the same time instanly obsoleting all previous Apple cables. It's a marketing dream! (nightmare for users, but since when has Apple ever cared about them?)
So that's why all the android devices with MHL outputs are so much more expensive than the iPhone? oh wait... they aren't.
I don't care where they put the chips, the end result is cheaper for the end user, and works more smoothly.
Also I can have a cable at every TV in my house, one on my desk at work, and one in my bag, and I didn't have to pay a fortune for each one.
Shiny tends to show fingerprints more (and as such is horrid on touch displays.)
"but... shiny!!!!"
Well that sounds like a positively awful plan...
Sandpaper will never give the same even finish that a proper matte screen gives, and will likely decrease the "crispness" (discussed earlier) in a very real way. I don't need to make it any harder to see the screen...
That depends, your power bill won't like you, and it may reduce the life of the backlight. Additionally some brands (though not all) also put advertising overlays on their "store" mode (and annoyingly, it is often very difficult to find a way to switch to "home" mode if someone chose the wrong option when they first plugged it in)
sorry, just to be clear, I wasn't accusing you of buying it, I was agreeing with you while pointing out what a ridiculous argument it is.
That is in fact one of the examples I used in my original post (I said inflatable as opposed to liquid filled, but that is the technology I was referring to.) And yes, I'm sure that a proper implementation is still a ways off. For one thing, as far as I can tell, this is still a touch screen with raised portions, which means that sliding your finger over the buttons to find the right one still means hitting every key on the way (as opposed to physical devices where you can slide your way to the third button over and then press it in) additionally, they still haven't found a way to do knobs or sliders. I believe this is a step in the right direction, but not "there" yet.
As for 60 years away... that depends. People are historically AWFUL at predicting the future. To look at TNG examples, we've already pretty much surpassed the PADD tablets they used, and the phones in our pockets in many ways do a lot more than their communicators. At the time it originally aired I remember thinking how amazing it would be to have a computer like the one on the Enterprise that had the entire knowledge of mankind at your fingertips. Now I carry one in my pocket. But of course there are other parts to their technology. Replicators are both on the verge of becoming reality (3D printers) and impossibly far off (ordering a full meal and having it appear in seconds) Transporters are a ways away yet (probably more than 60 years) and warp drive... well our best understanding right now can't even come up with a way it would be physically possible even disregarding technological limitations. (I'm an optimist though, so I will not go so far as to say that it is impossible, only that a way to do so is as of yet undiscovered)
Interestingly enough though, perhaps the one part of Star Trek that I actually find the most believable though is the societal story it tells, of a post scarcity society without money and with endless opportunities. I think that it is true that we will get to that point, I also think we will go through some very dark times to get there, so several hundred years away may be pretty accurate for that part. (And Star Trek does in fact talk about those dark times as well, as much as we nerds love the tech, it is at it's core a story about humanity more than about technology)
Or we could save the money on that product which is bound to be a huge cost sink and just use existing matte technologies....
In fact such a technology exists on almost all modern TVs. they have a "store mode" and a "home mode" the difference is the store mode runs at max brightness at all times so as to wash out the glare. Often times the "home mode" isn't even capable of getting to the same brightness because they would never get energy star certification if it did. (have you ever wondered why electronics ask you when you first set them up if you are a store or not?)
I don't buy that "crispness" argument for a second. I have 3 matte screens in front of me at home, and the picture is plenty crisp. I can also see what I'm doing even with the lights on.
There is absolutely no excuse for shiny screens. I've never talked to anybody who prefers them, but marketing departments obviously do...
But that is exactly the point. watching someone move a mouse around is boring, if you want it to be interesting in a movie you need to exaggerate the gestures. Little things don't show well on screen, so they get made big.
For film this is good. The problem isn't that these are bad movie interfaces, they're actually very good for movies. The problem only comes when someone watches the movie and then decides they should cripple the rest of the world with the same interface because it looks neat.
I gave up. I really didn't want a phone without a physical keyboard. but at the same time, I did want a modern phone, and the manufacturers refuse to sell anything where I am that qualifies as both. The only phones I can find with physical keyboards are a minimum of about 3 generations behind the current phones.
So I compromised and gave up on a physical keyboard. Unfortunately I'm now "proof" to these idiot companies that people "want" phones without keyboards, when in fact I'm the opposite, there just wasn't an option there that fit.
The biggest problem as I see it is that you can't feel the controls. Like all the interfaces in ST:TNG, there is too much dependence on having to look where your hands are. I think that's a distraction at a very basic level that we haven't fully noticed yet, let alone dealt with in any meaningful way.
Think of your old-school cell phone. You could make a call, even text, without looking at it. (Or, I could. Your mileage may vary, I guess.) Can you do that with your glass-smooth smartphone now?
Unfortunately physical buttons are expensive, especially on a device that really needs a touch screen for some things anyway. I clung to my slide out qwerty keyboard for as long as I could, but had to eventually get a touchscreen because that's all the manufacturers want to make.
The good news is that it's not a problem that people don't know about. And in fact several companies have come up with various technologies to try to make a touchscreen tactile (I saw one idea that was basically inflatable bubbles under the surface of the screen that could inflate buttons as needed, I believe it was blackberry who a while ago made their whole screen push in like a button when you clicked on it, and of course almost every phone these days has haptic feedback (which I usually turn off as soon as I can)). Unfortunately none of these have worked well yet, but give it some time and we may get there yet.
I do find it interesting that you mention ST:TNG, from what I understand the theory behind their LCARS "touchscreens" was that it actually was tactile, just using a technology that we don't yet have (and that obviously wasn't so visible on screen) with the idea that you could actually have the best of both worlds. A shared console that each user could easily re-arrange for their particular preference, or current task, while still retaining the feel of real buttons. At the moment the idea sounds really appealing, but it's a ways off in implementation yet.
how often do you see a cell phone, tablet, or even laptop with a matte screen? They're almost all high glare nightmares.
The makers have ignored the best way of reducing glare because a shiny screen looks better, and therefore sells better, right up until the point where you try to actually use the thing.
The only way around it is to crank up the brightness to try to overcome the glare, kills battery life, but it's worth it for a shiny screen when it's off right????
if you take it to the police, even if your particular department is useless on these sorts of issues, they will at least file a report. They many not do anything at all with it after they file it. But at least it's on record.
Now this doesn't help with the immediate problem, but if the crooks are successful in working their way past some logins and to a point where they have actually got access to something important (like a bank account, or heaven forbid enough information to get ID issued in your name) then when you go to clean up the mess, you have a paper trail saying things are happening. makes it more likely they'll believe you at that point.
You missed the third, and most likely option. The car failed in a way that could have been controlled had the driver been capable and competent. But which this driver failed to control and instead blamed on multiple systems failing instead of just one.
I'm not saying the car didn't experience a failure, it's likely that it did. I'm just saying the most likely case is that the human didn't handle said failure in an ideal way.
Sadly, even if the US had complex testing to get a license, you're only tested once, when you first get your license. Then again (written) at 65. People memorize enough of the handbook to pass the test, and then forget all of it. The driving test is even more of a joke. There's almost zero test of car operations and control -- stop/start, gear selection, and keep it between the lines. 3 point turn? I don't think they do that anymore. Parallel parking? no longer taught or tested. (not that I've seen any parallel parking in decades.)
These are three systems; they're all controlled by one computer system. (abs is completely independent system. that's not really going to help here, unless you have a diag system attached... even then those programs are for bleeding air from the abs, not controlled braking.)
Except that they aren't really all controlled by 1 computer. The brakes are still a manual system. There aren't any cars built with entirely "brake by wire" and tests have shown that even the most powerful cars have brakes that will overpower the engine and bring you to a stop. There has also never been a properly documented case of a car refusing to turn off when properly requested.
As for the engineer, he's essentially irrelevant as he wasn't in the car, and if you've ever done any tech support for anyone over the phone you know how likely it is that they did everything exactly the way you asked them to.
I seriously doubt there is a widespread problem with anyone getting any vaccines accidentally.