Ninety percent of the market uses Excel to work on small data sets.
And the rest of them should be using a different tool because Excel isn't designed to do what they are trying to use it for.
The old versions of Excel had limits on the number of columns and rows much tighter than was required by the hardware because the devs knew that anyone getting close to them was using the wrong program. Now they support the abuse, for better and worse.
Someone needs to remember this hardware was originally expected to last 90 days. It's been running for over fourteen fucking years.
This would probably be one of those times where you should STFU about failures in engineering and design, as the statistics tend to speak for themselves.
As a mass-production engineer I would be asking serious questions about the design process and quality controls.
Having a product last for over 56x longer than its designed and projected lifespan suggests that there is some serious over engineering involved. Are all those solar panels really needed? What if we added some lightening holes to the neck, the solid piece of aluminum seems like overkill and the weight savings will help lower distribution costs.
Honestly though, how can anyone pass judgment on the quality of engineering without seeing the design brief?
The USB-C connector is what USB should have been from the start. Yes, PD (Power delivery) is optional and you have to be a smart consumer. And it's been knowledge for years now that cheap chinese OEM's were producing non-standard compliant cables and devices that could actively harm compliant devices because the cables and chargers did not meet the spec. That's not USB's fault.
Would those be USB 2.0, USB 3.1, USB 3.1 Gen 2, USB Full Featured, USB Superspeed, USB Superspeed+ or Thunderbolt3 USB-C cables that you are talking about?
I only listed three different types of cables there but they are all different markings and symbols which are commonly used. Apart from the symbol on the plug all the cables are of course identical. Then add power delivery and PD variants of the logos. Non-compliant cables are yet another but relatively small issue, though the ones that carry the compliance logos and slide into the supply chain can be scary.
When people get confused the better solution is not to say that they aren't smart enough, but consider if there are issues with the product.
Nuclear battery pacemakers used to be a thing. It seems doctors feel that having a newer, modern device every decade outweighs the disadvantage of surgery. Replacing a pacemaker is a relatively minor operation, they are implanted in an accessible location and the new device typically reuses the original leads.
We climb in a little metal box, hurtle towards another metal box at a closing speed of 200km/hr. Then, to make it safe, we paint a white line on the road and promise to both stay on one side of it. To make life exciting we then add wildlife, children playing, wet weather, tired alcoholics who have just broken up with their wives...
The system is absurd, it is mind blowing that it works as well as it does, but all the band aids like crumple zones, seatbelts and AI steering can't avoid the fact that the system we have evolved is inherently dangerous. Nobody would ever deliberately design a system like our roads and cars.
As an illustration, where I live people working on the side of the road must have a substantial crash barrier to protect them from the oncoming traffic and provide a safe working environment. That same worker can then get on a motorbike and ride home, protected only by a painted line, and nobody thinks anything of it.
Maybe YOU need rules on paper, but some of us are all grown up and don't need a piece of paper to tell us how we should behave.
Sadly common sense isn't universally common. The rules have to be written for the hidden non-grown ups among us. As a grown up, having a rule that tells you not to do something you were never going to do shouldn't bother you too much, not many people object to there being laws against murder.
For example at a previous workplace a rule was introduced which I nicknamed "thou shalt wear pants". Sounds stupid, was stupid. It was introduced because a developer stopped wearing pants. After several conversations asking him to put on pants, over a few weeks, a formal dress code had to be introduced.
The standard setup is three power supplies in each rack (they are shifting to two with v2) supplying DC power to each server. With one UPS rack supplying DC power to six server racks. No inverter in sight.
Also, Google used to run 12V batteries in every server but more recent designs haven't been publicly released.
As someone who did a fair amount of power electronics many years ago at University I can see that designing and constructing an efficient inverter for a UPS is a none-trivial task.
The difference between university electronics and real world electronics is vast. At university you are trying to learn fundamentals so you design things like inverters using basic components. In industry you want it to work and be cheap, so you buy an existing chip which does what you need and plonk down the circuit in their application note.
There are lots of inverter chips out there for the solar panel industry, the inverter shouldn't be a difficult part of the design.
This is news, but it isn't terribly exciting. It is like a service pack 4 release for Windows users.
Nothing big, a few fixes, a few minor upgrades to keep things from getting stale. Next week sysadmins will start planning the upgrade process which will probably go so simply and smoothly that nobody will really notice.
So this is all good and find in theory where everyone is on fiber and perfect copper, but the vast majority of Australia is on ADSL2+ which has a theoretical speed limit of 25/5 and a practical speed limit that is very much dependent on each individual customer and not at all in control of the ISP or how much bandwidth they are able to allocate to you.
How are they supposed to advertise this kind of service?
The same way they do now, don't mention performance. For ADSL customers performance isn't a differentiating feature when choosing an ISP. That is in the pitch, then they offer a detailed page like Internode's that goes into a fair bit of detail and allows you to guess at your speed.
The target of this is the NBN resellers. Particularly dodgy operators which offer 100Mbps plans over a wireless link that they know maxes out at a tenth of that, or under-provision the backhaul so everyone is crawling along.
Of course you can't avoid that this is really about a political party that promised fantastic internet with unicorns and sparkles, delivered a mule with fleas and desperately wants everyone to blame the stablehand.
And now Cloudfare have let the genie out of the bottle it seems like any site can be nuked, either because the CEO wakes up deciding to do it or due to a court order.
Somebody got out of the wrong side of bed this morning and is walking around in delusion land.
Of course Cloudfare, like every other substantial company complies with court orders, always has.
Last year Cloudfare received 153 court orders world wide and complied with the vast majority of them. We know this because they documented it in their biannual transparency report https://www.cloudflare.com/tra...
What ever your view on the actions around The Daily Stormer it is a completely independent issue to Cloudfare complying with lawfully issued court orders.
I worked with a Ubiquiti mPCIe board for a product we were building.
The hardware radio kill line, not supported, no software flight mode system, no way to stop the thing blasting out RF other than to switch off the power rails.
We had bought hundreds of the things, I tried contacting our distributor, technical support, public forums, public email addresses. The silence was deafening.
Needless to say, Ubiquiti is no longer on my Christmas card list.
The peak electricity price at the German exchange was 135€/MWh. How do they come to 14,000 AU$?
The significant difference is one of scale and distance. More specifically the number of power plants, their range due to power drops in lines and number of interconnects due to density.
The nearest city and major power consumer to Adelaide - the major city in the area we are talking about - is Melbourne, roughly 700km away. Most of the power generation which supplies Melbourne is on the far side, so even further.
In comparison, 700km from Berlin includes the entirety of Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Austria, Czechoslovakia and about 90% of Poland, Belgium and Slovakia.
It is unsurprising then that there is several magnitudes more demand, supply and interconnects. With this will naturally come more stability, both in the spot price and overall network stability. The impact of one power plant having a fault in South Australia is to lose 10% of the supply. The impact of losing one power plant in Germany is hardly noticeable.
A blockchain is a list of records which are resistant to modification. The current state is the accumulation of all the previous states, as such you can inspect the history to see each state alteration, this history cannot be modified without destroying the chain.
With this in mind, the records you mentioned such as medical, marriage, and especially property could potentially benefit from the application of a blockchain.
I own a property, I know this because there is an entry in the state database saying that I do. There is no deed or other formal evidence.
If someone were to edit that database so that I never owned the property, things would be really awkward. An append only ledger would be a considerable improvement. The government seizing the property by adding the the chain is fine, as there is evidence of the transaction which can be disputed.
Aren't containers inherently a bit bloaty, each container replicating the same things...
Yes, but you are optimizing the wrong problem.
Disk space is cheap, ram is fairly cheap, the overhead is probably less than you would expect and there are ways to reduce it if you actually have an issue.
Managing deployments, library conflicts, update roll outs etc. is expensive. It involves hours of labour, slows down your pipeline and a mistake can kill your service.
Using containers allows you to create a simple, easily testable, reproducible and deployable bundle with everything you care about and nothing you don't.
Callers get details wrong all the time, dispatchers selectively pass on information and sometimes make mistakes, the team leader will then selectively pass on information and also make mistakes. Basically think chinese whispers but with stress.
Basically there are three things the team being sent out is looking for:
1. Address
2. Priority
3. Rough idea of what is going on to form a preliminary plan, evaluate risk and call on required resources.
Keep in mind the old adage though, no plan survives contact with the enemy. The executed plan almost never matches the preliminary one.
The fact that the house had the wrong number of floors wouldn't have even caused a pause.
A simple story that I think is an easier to understand explanation of the variety in risk tolerance.
I was fortunate enough to spend some time in Antarctica. Part of this time was minding a fuel hose about 10cm high, and I observed several groups of penguins negotiate the hose.
A pack of twenty would waddle along and hit the obstacle of the hose. They walk up and down along it a bit to see if they can get around.
Then two penguins jump the hose and walk on.
The rest of the pack, observing that those two are ok quickly jump over and continue on their way.
Except for three, who hesitate for some reason. They walk up and down again, they get increasingly agitated as the pack gets further away. Two eventually jump over. The last is running up and down the line, freaking out at being left behind and eventually trips and falls over the hose. Picks itself up and sprints after the pack.
Penguins display the same basic behaviour when confronted with any obstacle, like a group of people playing tourist or jumping into leopard seal infested water.
I never saw one stupid enough to stare into the sun though.
I have come up with a set of methods simplifying things like memory management and array instantiation.
Your method seems sane and will help you significantly, it will however cause issues as your code base grows. As an example non-linear code like callbacks may trip you up. Having multiple copies of your string pointer, possibly storing one or more of them in a struct and knowing when the free should be called. There are numerous issues that will crop up from time to time, all can be solved with care and the addition of extra layers such as reference counting.
The biggest issue with your approach is that it assumes that you personally are infallible. You might be good, but you aren't that good. And the impact of screwing it up is high.
I strongly suggest looking at the talloc library. It is an alternative memory pool with reference counting. It greatly simplifies your code, removes the need for conventions and significantly reduces the risk and impact of a mistake.
Slashdot Mirror
Ninety percent of the market uses Excel to work on small data sets.
And the rest of them should be using a different tool because Excel isn't designed to do what they are trying to use it for.
The old versions of Excel had limits on the number of columns and rows much tighter than was required by the hardware because the devs knew that anyone getting close to them was using the wrong program. Now they support the abuse, for better and worse.
Someone needs to remember this hardware was originally expected to last 90 days. It's been running for over fourteen fucking years.
This would probably be one of those times where you should STFU about failures in engineering and design, as the statistics tend to speak for themselves.
As a mass-production engineer I would be asking serious questions about the design process and quality controls.
Having a product last for over 56x longer than its designed and projected lifespan suggests that there is some serious over engineering involved. Are all those solar panels really needed? What if we added some lightening holes to the neck, the solid piece of aluminum seems like overkill and the weight savings will help lower distribution costs.
Honestly though, how can anyone pass judgment on the quality of engineering without seeing the design brief?
If he invented the machine screw, Google is claiming a patent for a machine screw used to hold together a bookcase.
There is no transformative act, simply a straightforward application in an expected field.
The USB-C connector is what USB should have been from the start. Yes, PD (Power delivery) is optional and you have to be a smart consumer. And it's been knowledge for years now that cheap chinese OEM's were producing non-standard compliant cables and devices that could actively harm compliant devices because the cables and chargers did not meet the spec. That's not USB's fault.
Would those be USB 2.0, USB 3.1, USB 3.1 Gen 2, USB Full Featured, USB Superspeed, USB Superspeed+ or Thunderbolt3 USB-C cables that you are talking about?
I only listed three different types of cables there but they are all different markings and symbols which are commonly used. Apart from the symbol on the plug all the cables are of course identical. Then add power delivery and PD variants of the logos. Non-compliant cables are yet another but relatively small issue, though the ones that carry the compliance logos and slide into the supply chain can be scary.
When people get confused the better solution is not to say that they aren't smart enough, but consider if there are issues with the product.
Took two hours for the Gitlab confirmation email to come in, seems like they are busy.
Actually pacemakers get identified and removed, otherwise you have a corpse with a pulse and that makes lots of people nervous.
Nuclear battery pacemakers used to be a thing. It seems doctors feel that having a newer, modern device every decade outweighs the disadvantage of surgery. Replacing a pacemaker is a relatively minor operation, they are implanted in an accessible location and the new device typically reuses the original leads.
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2015/ph241/degraw2/
We climb in a little metal box, hurtle towards another metal box at a closing speed of 200km/hr. Then, to make it safe, we paint a white line on the road and promise to both stay on one side of it. To make life exciting we then add wildlife, children playing, wet weather, tired alcoholics who have just broken up with their wives...
The system is absurd, it is mind blowing that it works as well as it does, but all the band aids like crumple zones, seatbelts and AI steering can't avoid the fact that the system we have evolved is inherently dangerous. Nobody would ever deliberately design a system like our roads and cars.
As an illustration, where I live people working on the side of the road must have a substantial crash barrier to protect them from the oncoming traffic and provide a safe working environment. That same worker can then get on a motorbike and ride home, protected only by a painted line, and nobody thinks anything of it.
Better headline: Teachers shocked to discover that students doing tests on a computer knew how to operate the computer.
Maybe YOU need rules on paper, but some of us are all grown up and don't need a piece of paper to tell us how we should behave.
Sadly common sense isn't universally common. The rules have to be written for the hidden non-grown ups among us. As a grown up, having a rule that tells you not to do something you were never going to do shouldn't bother you too much, not many people object to there being laws against murder.
For example at a previous workplace a rule was introduced which I nicknamed "thou shalt wear pants". Sounds stupid, was stupid. It was introduced because a developer stopped wearing pants. After several conversations asking him to put on pants, over a few weeks, a formal dress code had to be introduced.
This is just the latest of a number of state sponsored attacks that Kaspersky has published details on. They are doing fantastic work.
Whatever your view on the level of the cooperation with the Russian state, exposing these sophisticated attacks and attack vectors makes us all safer.
What you are asking for is essentially the open compute design.
http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2011/05/open-compute-ups-power-supply/
http://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Open_Rack/SpecsAndDesigns
The standard setup is three power supplies in each rack (they are shifting to two with v2) supplying DC power to each server. With one UPS rack supplying DC power to six server racks. No inverter in sight.
Also, Google used to run 12V batteries in every server but more recent designs haven't been publicly released.
As someone who did a fair amount of power electronics many years ago at University I can see that designing and constructing an efficient inverter for a UPS is a none-trivial task.
The difference between university electronics and real world electronics is vast. At university you are trying to learn fundamentals so you design things like inverters using basic components. In industry you want it to work and be cheap, so you buy an existing chip which does what you need and plonk down the circuit in their application note.
There are lots of inverter chips out there for the solar panel industry, the inverter shouldn't be a difficult part of the design.
They are here.
This is news, but it isn't terribly exciting. It is like a service pack 4 release for Windows users.
Nothing big, a few fixes, a few minor upgrades to keep things from getting stale. Next week sysadmins will start planning the upgrade process which will probably go so simply and smoothly that nobody will really notice.
So this is all good and find in theory where everyone is on fiber and perfect copper, but the vast majority of Australia is on ADSL2+ which has a theoretical speed limit of 25/5 and a practical speed limit that is very much dependent on each individual customer and not at all in control of the ISP or how much bandwidth they are able to allocate to you.
How are they supposed to advertise this kind of service?
The same way they do now, don't mention performance. For ADSL customers performance isn't a differentiating feature when choosing an ISP. That is in the pitch, then they offer a detailed page like Internode's that goes into a fair bit of detail and allows you to guess at your speed.
The target of this is the NBN resellers. Particularly dodgy operators which offer 100Mbps plans over a wireless link that they know maxes out at a tenth of that, or under-provision the backhaul so everyone is crawling along.
Of course you can't avoid that this is really about a political party that promised fantastic internet with unicorns and sparkles, delivered a mule with fleas and desperately wants everyone to blame the stablehand.
And now Cloudfare have let the genie out of the bottle it seems like any site can be nuked, either because the CEO wakes up deciding to do it or due to a court order.
Somebody got out of the wrong side of bed this morning and is walking around in delusion land.
Of course Cloudfare, like every other substantial company complies with court orders, always has.
Last year Cloudfare received 153 court orders world wide and complied with the vast majority of them. We know this because they documented it in their biannual transparency report https://www.cloudflare.com/tra...
What ever your view on the actions around The Daily Stormer it is a completely independent issue to Cloudfare complying with lawfully issued court orders.
I worked with a Ubiquiti mPCIe board for a product we were building.
The hardware radio kill line, not supported, no software flight mode system, no way to stop the thing blasting out RF other than to switch off the power rails.
We had bought hundreds of the things, I tried contacting our distributor, technical support, public forums, public email addresses. The silence was deafening.
Needless to say, Ubiquiti is no longer on my Christmas card list.
The peak electricity price at the German exchange was 135€/MWh. How do they come to 14,000 AU$?
The significant difference is one of scale and distance. More specifically the number of power plants, their range due to power drops in lines and number of interconnects due to density.
The nearest city and major power consumer to Adelaide - the major city in the area we are talking about - is Melbourne, roughly 700km away. Most of the power generation which supplies Melbourne is on the far side, so even further.
In comparison, 700km from Berlin includes the entirety of Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Austria, Czechoslovakia and about 90% of Poland, Belgium and Slovakia.
It is unsurprising then that there is several magnitudes more demand, supply and interconnects. With this will naturally come more stability, both in the spot price and overall network stability. The impact of one power plant having a fault in South Australia is to lose 10% of the supply. The impact of losing one power plant in Germany is hardly noticeable.
A blockchain is a list of records which are resistant to modification. The current state is the accumulation of all the previous states, as such you can inspect the history to see each state alteration, this history cannot be modified without destroying the chain.
With this in mind, the records you mentioned such as medical, marriage, and especially property could potentially benefit from the application of a blockchain.
I own a property, I know this because there is an entry in the state database saying that I do. There is no deed or other formal evidence. If someone were to edit that database so that I never owned the property, things would be really awkward. An append only ledger would be a considerable improvement. The government seizing the property by adding the the chain is fine, as there is evidence of the transaction which can be disputed.
Aren't containers inherently a bit bloaty, each container replicating the same things...
Yes, but you are optimizing the wrong problem.
Disk space is cheap, ram is fairly cheap, the overhead is probably less than you would expect and there are ways to reduce it if you actually have an issue.
Managing deployments, library conflicts, update roll outs etc. is expensive. It involves hours of labour, slows down your pipeline and a mistake can kill your service.
Using containers allows you to create a simple, easily testable, reproducible and deployable bundle with everything you care about and nothing you don't.
Callers get details wrong all the time, dispatchers selectively pass on information and sometimes make mistakes, the team leader will then selectively pass on information and also make mistakes. Basically think chinese whispers but with stress.
Basically there are three things the team being sent out is looking for:
Keep in mind the old adage though, no plan survives contact with the enemy. The executed plan almost never matches the preliminary one.
The fact that the house had the wrong number of floors wouldn't have even caused a pause.
Only if it was a bank. Which it wasn't.
And there was no theft at the institution. Which there was.
A simple story that I think is an easier to understand explanation of the variety in risk tolerance.
I was fortunate enough to spend some time in Antarctica. Part of this time was minding a fuel hose about 10cm high, and I observed several groups of penguins negotiate the hose.
A pack of twenty would waddle along and hit the obstacle of the hose. They walk up and down along it a bit to see if they can get around.
Then two penguins jump the hose and walk on.
The rest of the pack, observing that those two are ok quickly jump over and continue on their way.
Except for three, who hesitate for some reason. They walk up and down again, they get increasingly agitated as the pack gets further away. Two eventually jump over. The last is running up and down the line, freaking out at being left behind and eventually trips and falls over the hose. Picks itself up and sprints after the pack.
Penguins display the same basic behaviour when confronted with any obstacle, like a group of people playing tourist or jumping into leopard seal infested water.
I never saw one stupid enough to stare into the sun though.
I am a C coder and love it.
I have come up with a set of methods simplifying things like memory management and array instantiation.
Your method seems sane and will help you significantly, it will however cause issues as your code base grows. As an example non-linear code like callbacks may trip you up. Having multiple copies of your string pointer, possibly storing one or more of them in a struct and knowing when the free should be called. There are numerous issues that will crop up from time to time, all can be solved with care and the addition of extra layers such as reference counting.
The biggest issue with your approach is that it assumes that you personally are infallible. You might be good, but you aren't that good. And the impact of screwing it up is high.
I strongly suggest looking at the talloc library. It is an alternative memory pool with reference counting. It greatly simplifies your code, removes the need for conventions and significantly reduces the risk and impact of a mistake.
Worse, it is Bleeping Computer reposting a Mozilla blog entry and submitting it to Slashdot.
The third example of this I have seen in the last week or so.