companies will start taking a sharper look at their hiring practices and employees on staff.
Hilarious. But seriously, their industry is made to look really bad by the get rich quick outsourcing. The good news is that being in that position allows them to make out like bandits by charging for work to be done and then hiring unqualified to fulfill the arrangement. The bad news is everyone starts assuming that's what the entire India IT tech industry is, and that's very unfortunate and is a big obstacle to ambitions of truly stepping onto the world stage as a first class industry rather than just the cheaper choice.
It's similar to China's situation with manufacturing. They got in the door by, among other things, compromising on quality for the sake of cost. Now as they are doing a lot to improve the situation, they have a lot of skepticism to overcome from previous experience. Similarly South Korea was a source of crappy knock-off product though the mid 90s, but they have successfully moved beyond that.
Of course, right overhead is a rare optimistic case. Worst case would be satellite on horizon, there your round trip would be at least 130 ms (assuming at least 300 km orbit). By satellite standards pretty good and serviceable for most non-gaming situations.
Adding solar UAVs to the mix may confer a lot of the benefits of geosyncronous satellites, though would require a ton more of them.
Depends on how low earth we are talking, and how many.
It seems that a minimum practical orbit for satellites would be 300 km. At that altitude, assuming you wanted to minimize the count of satellites then you'll be having to reach a satellite on the horizon which would mean 2,000 km at that altitude, for a worst case round trip of about 130 ms, and a best case of about 2 ms, depending on the best positioned visible satellite. Adding more satellites can result in achieving some cap on worst case.
It could be possible to have acceptable latency, but the cost may be too great (the lower the orbit, the more fuel needed to maintain orbit before it falls).
Of course, another thing to ponder would be solar powered UAVs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinetiq_Zephyr). A lot more would be needed and would have to rotate in and out of service, but being reusable could be a huge plus (and the latency goes to worst case 3 ms round trip). Also could be more specifically deployed (a satellite orbit will necessarily provide coverage over it's orbit, which may include a lot of empty surface area).
In this case I'd say it is a very plausible statement. It's one thing if such a convenient consequence happens as a side effect of conspicuosly doing something a very particular way. Here the simplest way of implementing such a mechanism *also* happens to be the one where certain use cases are needlessly throttled.
Oh there's clearly a broader "spirit" of most laws, the general mindset that would extend the principles of a law to related areas not explicitly covered. However to believe that Google gives a crap about the spirit of net neutrality when it serves their interests to go the other way and the letter of the law allows the is naive.
Case in point, all this went down when net neutrality was formally the case and ostensibly when Google's rhetoric about net neutrality being a good thing was at a peak. That would seem very inconsistent with dropping FireOS device support, but they really did not care.
I wouldn't even mind if they required tools to replace the battery, so long as said tools didn't likely damage the phone and they didn't solder in the battery leads or use adhesive on the battery.
My laptop uses what is described as a 'non-removable battery', but a phillips head screwdriver lets me in, I can unplug the battery and swap it out. Similar story for batteries in playstation controllers, though I'm convinced sony ordered screws made of playdough, the heads of those screws are way too soft, though certainly it's not nearly as convenient as slipping NiMHs into oculus touch controllers or xbox one controllers.
"ubuntu 17.10" is a perfectly viable search term, except missing the pages that never mention the version number, but vice versa also happens since they have both and some people use only the names, others just use the version number, splitting potential search results when doing by keyword.
In your second scenario, 'openbsd httpd' would seem to be a viable search term, though I admit having a uniue and specific name for a particular project or subproject makes sense, but naming versions is an exercise in frustration, especially since Ubuntu's version numbers can be derived from the release date. I don't have to keep active tabs on Ubunutu to know that 17.10 is the most recent release, because it is 2017 and past October. I also don't have to think too hard about roughly when the next release is and what it'll be (18.4, 2018 in April)
Additionally, in laptop land they tend to issue a warning when battery performance is degraded compared to original condition. It wouldn't be such a terrible idea for mobile devices to do the same, so long as there were a reasonable way to service the battery (which often there is not).
The (poor) assumption is that a would be shoplifter would transfer the item to the scale to make it look like part of everything else they are buying without scanning.
However as of late none of the self checkout lanes seem to be so picky about the weight. Either they got better at it or stopped bothering. The other day my daughter sad on the bagging area but it didn't complain, so I'm guessing a lot of places just disable that feature.
I'm not sure how you are thinking this, the NYSE in terms of dollar volume is in the hundreds of billion a day, contrasted with bitcoin's 2-3 billion usd/day.
Unless you mistook *share* volume for dollar volume, I don't see how you could have reached that conclusion.
Probably some UEFI configuration utility that sets write and then some sort of staged config change update area.
Presumably if the system does not have a new bios, it then goes to process what turns out to be an empty changeset, which was not a case they anticipated, and hitting some weird fallback to recover from invalid utility behavior.
The difference is that formerly, the OS didn't dare include capabilities to screw with the BIOS ROM as a matter of course (it was always possible). There was too much concern that there wasn't enough consitency between vendors.
Here you have Intel thinking the entire world is using Tiano core and Intel reference platform, so Intel feels more confident putting code mainline to screw with the SPI roms.
Well, it's an *option* to use some of the space to host a UEFI shell, though not all vendors bother to do so. It's basically like installing dos in your BIOS rom. UEFI shell is basically the same thing as command.com: an extremely thin layer on top of firmware calls. Of course that USEFI can have network drivers and filesystem drivers whereas BIOS only ever had the concept of block device access and access MBR as a program baked in.
When it comes to servers, increasingly the expectation is that you use the management port to apply the update remotely unless you make a boot disk (usually linux base) or use the operating system to do the update.
Bitcoin is gambling meets unregulated financial market.
Even with that, the total global trading volume of bitcoin is approximately 1% of the NYSE. Given the performance, that's crazy low trading volume getting extrapolated to total value. Because it's a complete crapshoot. It's economy by mob rule, and history has shown that as we got more connected, unregulated economic systems swing very far and wide, which is great when it goes up, impossibly devastating when it inevitably corrects if it is important.
Of course no way to know how it will be employee, but I could see some active threat alert, but shouldn't require a policemen to be injured prior to such an alert being issued.
*Maybe* if an officer is missing, but I can't imagine that's one of the more likely threat scenarios.
The volume of amber alerts is low, I'm perfectly willing to receive and at least check out a few license plates if that info is provided.
Sometimes the alert is uselessly vague, a picture could at least help, but describing a fairly common vehicle and/or person in text format doesn't give me anything I could use to help identify. If there is an off chance that it clicks that something looks a bit off and matches the description, ok.
The silver alerts seem to bit a bit more half-assed. I only know that one exists when one of the electronic signs says "there is a silver alert, *call for more info*, not nearly so aggressive. Generally when you do look into it, it's keep an eye out for person who is liekly to be wandering out of their mind, which when I have seen that I'd call about it regardless.
I am a bit curious as to the intent of a blue alert. For the other alerts, they want as many people as possible to assisst by looking and calling in. Surely for a blue alert they already know what is up and don't need help. If it is to keep bystanders out, it seems a weird way of phrasing it.
I would have guessed clear or shelter in place as presumably this indicates some imminent risk to the area. However, keying that off of policemen under threat would seem to be a pretty indirect way to say that as opposed to a more general, but more localized emergency broadcast system message..
In this particular case, the dark skin of the democratic candidate in 2008 drove many of them to vote as a bloc on the republican side. Also, Trump riled that up with a lot of general xenophobic rhetoric about hispanics and muslims, and also reacting to the coverage to police on black violence in a way that got the Klan pretty happy with him.
So at least in terms of the last and current president, people for whom racism is a key political principle are currently nominally republican.
In terms of percentage, I'm hoping they are small but very loud, and that the economic meltdown that sparked in the last few months of the George W Bush presidency was a bigger factor as it dominated Obama's term, and the methods used to stop the bleeding mostly helped the stock market and didn't materialize as healing the lower and middle class. Of course I still say that it was neither Bush nor Obama's fault, and the steps to mitigate the disaster probably were about the best that could be hoped for, even if the benefits are unfair.
I think the racism was certainly a vocal part of it, though I have to hope in terms of actual votes that the economic situation weighed more heavily (though in that case the economy was torn up prior to his term and the recovery took time). See also: people crediting/blaming president for economic circumstances, when most of the time the sitting president is a matter of coincidence rather than cause of economic state (though certainly presidents can and have mitigated or triggered disastrous economic events, most of the time the economy disasters are apolitical.
While that has been true to some extent, it has never been so ridiculous as it has been now. Basically from the moment Obama got elected, the republican party went nuts. The first sign of problems was the Tea Party and now we have a Trump presidency. Even ignoring Trump, the republican primaries had quite a few crazies overshadowing reasonable candidates.
George W. Bush had one huge screw up and very likely corruption at the heart of why (Iraq) and I would argue a bit weak and mostly had shots called by others in his administration, but the party in general was a bit more reasonable. McCain was a very good candidate and I wouldn't have minded the least if he won. Romney was out of touch and a weak candidate, but even then I wouldn't have been *too* concerned.
I don't know if it was racism reaction to a not quite fully white president or an inevitable reaction to the economy collapsing or some combination of both, but something started stirring in the republican party in 2009 that was just nasty. Combine that with a weak candidate that also triggers the frothing anti-clinton and anti-woman factions, while also pissing off democrats by doing unfair things to Sanders and we got Trump.
Slashdot Mirror
I was told about Japan being in that situation, but I think that was a tad before my time. I barely got to see South Korea go through it.
They both serve as symbols of how poor reputation can be forgiven in relatively short timespan.
companies will start taking a sharper look at their hiring practices and employees on staff.
Hilarious. But seriously, their industry is made to look really bad by the get rich quick outsourcing. The good news is that being in that position allows them to make out like bandits by charging for work to be done and then hiring unqualified to fulfill the arrangement. The bad news is everyone starts assuming that's what the entire India IT tech industry is, and that's very unfortunate and is a big obstacle to ambitions of truly stepping onto the world stage as a first class industry rather than just the cheaper choice.
It's similar to China's situation with manufacturing. They got in the door by, among other things, compromising on quality for the sake of cost. Now as they are doing a lot to improve the situation, they have a lot of skepticism to overcome from previous experience. Similarly South Korea was a source of crappy knock-off product though the mid 90s, but they have successfully moved beyond that.
Of course *all* satellite communication is at the speed of light, whether optical or not.
Of course, right overhead is a rare optimistic case. Worst case would be satellite on horizon, there your round trip would be at least 130 ms (assuming at least 300 km orbit). By satellite standards pretty good and serviceable for most non-gaming situations.
Adding solar UAVs to the mix may confer a lot of the benefits of geosyncronous satellites, though would require a ton more of them.
Depends on how low earth we are talking, and how many.
It seems that a minimum practical orbit for satellites would be 300 km. At that altitude, assuming you wanted to minimize the count of satellites then you'll be having to reach a satellite on the horizon which would mean 2,000 km at that altitude, for a worst case round trip of about 130 ms, and a best case of about 2 ms, depending on the best positioned visible satellite. Adding more satellites can result in achieving some cap on worst case.
It could be possible to have acceptable latency, but the cost may be too great (the lower the orbit, the more fuel needed to maintain orbit before it falls).
Of course, another thing to ponder would be solar powered UAVs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinetiq_Zephyr). A lot more would be needed and would have to rotate in and out of service, but being reusable could be a huge plus (and the latency goes to worst case 3 ms round trip). Also could be more specifically deployed (a satellite orbit will necessarily provide coverage over it's orbit, which may include a lot of empty surface area).
In a civil case, sure, but even then inferring malicuous intent may be difficult.
I suppose the court could order them to make it configurable and/or exempt certain scenarios, but I wouldn't be expecting a payday out of it.
In this case I'd say it is a very plausible statement. It's one thing if such a convenient consequence happens as a side effect of conspicuosly doing something a very particular way. Here the simplest way of implementing such a mechanism *also* happens to be the one where certain use cases are needlessly throttled.
Oh there's clearly a broader "spirit" of most laws, the general mindset that would extend the principles of a law to related areas not explicitly covered. However to believe that Google gives a crap about the spirit of net neutrality when it serves their interests to go the other way and the letter of the law allows the is naive.
Case in point, all this went down when net neutrality was formally the case and ostensibly when Google's rhetoric about net neutrality being a good thing was at a peak. That would seem very inconsistent with dropping FireOS device support, but they really did not care.
I wouldn't even mind if they required tools to replace the battery, so long as said tools didn't likely damage the phone and they didn't solder in the battery leads or use adhesive on the battery.
My laptop uses what is described as a 'non-removable battery', but a phillips head screwdriver lets me in, I can unplug the battery and swap it out. Similar story for batteries in playstation controllers, though I'm convinced sony ordered screws made of playdough, the heads of those screws are way too soft, though certainly it's not nearly as convenient as slipping NiMHs into oculus touch controllers or xbox one controllers.
"ubuntu 17.10" is a perfectly viable search term, except missing the pages that never mention the version number, but vice versa also happens since they have both and some people use only the names, others just use the version number, splitting potential search results when doing by keyword.
In your second scenario, 'openbsd httpd' would seem to be a viable search term, though I admit having a uniue and specific name for a particular project or subproject makes sense, but naming versions is an exercise in frustration, especially since Ubuntu's version numbers can be derived from the release date. I don't have to keep active tabs on Ubunutu to know that 17.10 is the most recent release, because it is 2017 and past October. I also don't have to think too hard about roughly when the next release is and what it'll be (18.4, 2018 in April)
Additionally, in laptop land they tend to issue a warning when battery performance is degraded compared to original condition. It wouldn't be such a terrible idea for mobile devices to do the same, so long as there were a reasonable way to service the battery (which often there is not).
No, it could then been argued they were just sloppy and didn't implement it in a sophisticated enough way.
Short of some actually explicit statement, it's going to be hard to 'prove' "they did this to force a new phone purchase".
The (poor) assumption is that a would be shoplifter would transfer the item to the scale to make it look like part of everything else they are buying without scanning.
However as of late none of the self checkout lanes seem to be so picky about the weight. Either they got better at it or stopped bothering. The other day my daughter sad on the bagging area but it didn't complain, so I'm guessing a lot of places just disable that feature.
I'm not sure how you are thinking this, the NYSE in terms of dollar volume is in the hundreds of billion a day, contrasted with bitcoin's 2-3 billion usd/day.
Unless you mistook *share* volume for dollar volume, I don't see how you could have reached that conclusion.
Probably some UEFI configuration utility that sets write and then some sort of staged config change update area.
Presumably if the system does not have a new bios, it then goes to process what turns out to be an empty changeset, which was not a case they anticipated, and hitting some weird fallback to recover from invalid utility behavior.
I remember a problem with a modem I bought back in the day, that was solved in a firmware update.
The firmware update was a package in the mail with a new chip and a chip puller.
Note having one of these devices was pretty neat. If I had a few thousand of them however....
The difference is that formerly, the OS didn't dare include capabilities to screw with the BIOS ROM as a matter of course (it was always possible). There was too much concern that there wasn't enough consitency between vendors.
Here you have Intel thinking the entire world is using Tiano core and Intel reference platform, so Intel feels more confident putting code mainline to screw with the SPI roms.
UEFI even has its own shell.
Well, it's an *option* to use some of the space to host a UEFI shell, though not all vendors bother to do so. It's basically like installing dos in your BIOS rom. UEFI shell is basically the same thing as command.com: an extremely thin layer on top of firmware calls. Of course that USEFI can have network drivers and filesystem drivers whereas BIOS only ever had the concept of block device access and access MBR as a program baked in.
When it comes to servers, increasingly the expectation is that you use the management port to apply the update remotely unless you make a boot disk (usually linux base) or use the operating system to do the update.
Bitcoin is gambling meets unregulated financial market.
Even with that, the total global trading volume of bitcoin is approximately 1% of the NYSE. Given the performance, that's crazy low trading volume getting extrapolated to total value. Because it's a complete crapshoot. It's economy by mob rule, and history has shown that as we got more connected, unregulated economic systems swing very far and wide, which is great when it goes up, impossibly devastating when it inevitably corrects if it is important.
Of course no way to know how it will be employee, but I could see some active threat alert, but shouldn't require a policemen to be injured prior to such an alert being issued.
*Maybe* if an officer is missing, but I can't imagine that's one of the more likely threat scenarios.
The volume of amber alerts is low, I'm perfectly willing to receive and at least check out a few license plates if that info is provided.
Sometimes the alert is uselessly vague, a picture could at least help, but describing a fairly common vehicle and/or person in text format doesn't give me anything I could use to help identify. If there is an off chance that it clicks that something looks a bit off and matches the description, ok.
The silver alerts seem to bit a bit more half-assed. I only know that one exists when one of the electronic signs says "there is a silver alert, *call for more info*, not nearly so aggressive. Generally when you do look into it, it's keep an eye out for person who is liekly to be wandering out of their mind, which when I have seen that I'd call about it regardless.
I am a bit curious as to the intent of a blue alert. For the other alerts, they want as many people as possible to assisst by looking and calling in. Surely for a blue alert they already know what is up and don't need help. If it is to keep bystanders out, it seems a weird way of phrasing it.
I would have guessed clear or shelter in place as presumably this indicates some imminent risk to the area. However, keying that off of policemen under threat would seem to be a pretty indirect way to say that as opposed to a more general, but more localized emergency broadcast system message..
In this particular case, the dark skin of the democratic candidate in 2008 drove many of them to vote as a bloc on the republican side. Also, Trump riled that up with a lot of general xenophobic rhetoric about hispanics and muslims, and also reacting to the coverage to police on black violence in a way that got the Klan pretty happy with him.
So at least in terms of the last and current president, people for whom racism is a key political principle are currently nominally republican.
In terms of percentage, I'm hoping they are small but very loud, and that the economic meltdown that sparked in the last few months of the George W Bush presidency was a bigger factor as it dominated Obama's term, and the methods used to stop the bleeding mostly helped the stock market and didn't materialize as healing the lower and middle class. Of course I still say that it was neither Bush nor Obama's fault, and the steps to mitigate the disaster probably were about the best that could be hoped for, even if the benefits are unfair.
I think the racism was certainly a vocal part of it, though I have to hope in terms of actual votes that the economic situation weighed more heavily (though in that case the economy was torn up prior to his term and the recovery took time). See also: people crediting/blaming president for economic circumstances, when most of the time the sitting president is a matter of coincidence rather than cause of economic state (though certainly presidents can and have mitigated or triggered disastrous economic events, most of the time the economy disasters are apolitical.
While that has been true to some extent, it has never been so ridiculous as it has been now. Basically from the moment Obama got elected, the republican party went nuts. The first sign of problems was the Tea Party and now we have a Trump presidency. Even ignoring Trump, the republican primaries had quite a few crazies overshadowing reasonable candidates.
George W. Bush had one huge screw up and very likely corruption at the heart of why (Iraq) and I would argue a bit weak and mostly had shots called by others in his administration, but the party in general was a bit more reasonable. McCain was a very good candidate and I wouldn't have minded the least if he won. Romney was out of touch and a weak candidate, but even then I wouldn't have been *too* concerned.
I don't know if it was racism reaction to a not quite fully white president or an inevitable reaction to the economy collapsing or some combination of both, but something started stirring in the republican party in 2009 that was just nasty. Combine that with a weak candidate that also triggers the frothing anti-clinton and anti-woman factions, while also pissing off democrats by doing unfair things to Sanders and we got Trump.