Well. There are many things which "provide us with additional income from people who don't understand basic physics". Starts with bigot religious books and doesnt end with esoteric medicine.
Many of these are much more dangerous and/or profitable than a z-shaped pedal.
There are a number of features which i love the note 2 for. Funnily the ultimate killer feature in the daily use of the note 2 is the idea that it vibrates shortly if you pick it up and there is a new message. This is so fucking brilliant and practical - you just can miss a new message with this. I also like the "flip over to turn silent" idea.
It looks like they're talking about doing stuff like including results from Google Maps in your web search results (whilst not doing the same for results from Bing Maps, etc.).
I dont think that that MS would allow to include bing results in the same way than google does with google maps.
Ultimatly, google searches googles databases. They should not be obliged to provide interfaces to other databases.
I just tested it. Googling for terms where they could get a advantage by placing their own products usually brings up competitions products first.
Using a webpage as intended (namely for machine-human interaction) should be allowed.
Writing programs which, withing the acceptable limits (honoring robots.txt and similar things) do an automated access for a purpose like searching etc. is obviuously also no problem
Using a program, which, with the *will* of the stupid lemmig (AKA Scriptkiddie/Anonymous follower) in front of the machine performs requests in a way which are not aligned with the intended puporse of the protocol, should obviously lead to criminal and civil persecution of the lemming (and its puppet master).
Writing a program which does such things against the will of the user is obviously criminal.
So, you fucking anonymous asshats: Yes - iff you collect millions of people who agree with you and they agree to personally load specific resources of a certain provider by manual interactions on the weppage, then yes, you are welciome to take down any webpage you like. But having a few hundred people who are mad that "can i haz the pornz for free" is not workign any more or that some company does not engage in activities which are considered illegal, or to support a alleged rapist, who claims to love free speach, but then buddies up with dictators?
Democracy works by gaining enough support, not by other things.
Allowing DDoS as political protest would also allow Amazon to DDos any webpage they dont like - if it has political claims. It would allow the all kind of opressive gouvernemnts ot do "political protests" agains oppositions webpages, and they could not even be tracked.
Recently my samsung galaxy note had some accident, so until it was repaired i was forced back to use my old nokia e63. Funny story: for email and podcasts (which is what matters to me on a mobile) i found that actually more productive, even after 2 years of using android phones/tablets, especially taking into account the battery life. I then checked in a store for the current symbian phone models, and i can honestly say: There is nothing in the smartphone world which matches the price/performance ratio of these. They are cheap, well designed, have an os where the bugs have been fixed. The UI is sensible, i can take one in my hand and still use it without thinking.
I would rather buy a new symbian phone as a second cheap reliabe outdoor phone for sports etc. than a nokia lumia (even if these are no bad either).
If nokia would not have bragged so much about changing the platforms, the best thing they could have done would have been to put a decent kernel below and keep the API stable.
You know, switching programming languages a lot can sometimes mess up your memory about the specific syntax. However, i think i would get a simple loop done in at least 5-6 languages....
No. Tests are assuming that the other person will fail.
Sad, but true: there are a lot of people with a CS degree which code worse than i coded with 18y. There are people around who call themself programmers who are not able to get a single fucking thing straight in a way that looking at the layers of comments which sound like a "programmign for dummies" book put trough dadadodo. Some of applicants misestimate themself so grossly that it hurts, some may be desperate to get the job and polish their CV a little, and some are outright psychopathic liars whos first thought will be how to push the real work on interns which come and go and therefore wont take the credit.
Somebody with a complete education must be able to solve an undergrad problem without thinking much, just sytematically applying knowledfge and understanding.
In the same way in which anybody can expect that I (Phd in physics) will solve a decay equation correctly without trying aroung for hours or set up a equation of motion for a dynamical system without looking up for hours in textbooks (i am at least supposed to know where to find the solution), i expect that a self-announced programmer is able to write down somthing which applies a simple algorithmic principle to a small problem.
What i know about firearms: You can use them to kill people
What i know about semiautomatic firearms with big magazines: You can use them to kill many people
What i know about using weapons for self-defense: For a criminal it does not make a difference if he is shot in the torso once, or 5 times in the head. So istead of mentally matrubating how much am M16 would help you there, turn on your brain. If everybody would wear a short-arm small-caliber weapon in his pocket that would be much more effective than some nutheads collecting an arsenal of semiautomatic weapons.
Yeah, because you know. The only thing which can stop a bad guy with a nuke, is a good guy with a nuke.
Imagine the filthy atheist communist liberal coming running madly from washington to take away your right to be a redneck, strapped to a nuke. I mean the nly thing which can stop him befor he reach the school to nuke it with homosexual propaganda is if you nuke him herically first.
Constutions are there to define the minimum rights for the citizens (rights which the govt can not take away), not the gouvernment. If a right for something is not in the contitution then it is not there.
If you greatly enjoy targeting practice with these, i am sure you dont mind if i experiment around with toxic chemicals (yea, just making some sarin to kill the mules in my garde) or nuclear materials in the house down the street. Or drive with 200km/h on the highway and kill some family which was stupid enough to be in my way? All things which some people might enjoy, which are luckily no the norm.
Then dont the FUCK sell automatic/semiautomatic weapons. Best would be: sell no weapons to people which are not police Second best option: sell weapons which are able to shoot once or twice. Make a mechanism which requires approximately 15sec reloading time. Make the ammunition in a way which pollutes the weapon so strongly that after 10 shots the weapon needs to be cleaned.
Shooting once or twice is still enough to make being a burglar or robber a quite unhealthy business in average (if you believe in the self-defense shit).
Yes, you will neither be able to fend of zombie-herds nor the chinese army, should they be interested in you.
If you believe that bearing weapon is you constitutional right, fine. But please show me the paragraph where it says "any weapon of your choice, including weapons which were designed for warfare between military". Why don't you stack chemical weapons or nuclear weapons at home? Could be useful if you are overrun by atheists.
Internet dating is a great thing. Call me a fucking arrogant asshole, if you like. Some people dont realize that what follows is my honest opinion:
Yes, in fact the problem is not finding the people looking for a date. My procedure for the last time i looked for somebody (together for four years now) has been the following:
(1) Throw out everybody who has more than one education level difference. Same education level preferred.
(2) Remove women from set who use sterotypical language
(3) Remove women from set who speak less than 2 language fluently and understand less than 3 languages
(4) Technical/Scientifical Jobs preferred
Why, o why? I made the experience that having a Phd in physics while the partner struggles to finish a bachelor in a quite simple and non-demanding subject is an indicator for problems to come, even if you may love each other otherwise. So is a speed difference in reading of a factor of about 5 or more. Beyond some self-esteem issues of the partner:
1) Mobility. Its better if both persons have the same degree of mobility
2) similar income. Strongly strongly different incomes mean that the person with the lower income will probably follow the peroson with thhe higher income (since it is economically reasonable), making the situation usually even worse
3) Similar wordview. Do i really want to have a future wife with whom i will have to discuss wether evolution of creation is correct? Do I really want to have a fight about the ideals? Do i really, really want that my future wife has books in the bookshelf which classify as cheap esoteric bullshit which I would feels needs to be thrown in the thrash? The problem is less that the current worldvie may be different, but a scientific education strongly increases the bullshit filter (AKA scepticism) you have against various forms of political and religious propaganda. And believe me - its annouying to explain the problems over and over.
4) Similar lifestyle and ideals. Living in a big house in front of a city, going everyday to the same work for 30 years by travelling one our by car in one direction is not my lifestyle. "Settling down" means for me more something like "Settling down for 10 years". So no, somebody who expects me to settle down for 30 years may have some severe - unsolvable - conflicts with me.
So that is how i met my current significant other and i cant complain.
I kind of expected a comment like this, since i actually rememberd that there have been a big number of experimental scripting interfaces in the browsers of the 90s...
But i did no remember explicitely that perl was among these.
Iff you ever do something within the grey area, then do so without witnesses. Leaving an email trail that somthing is done in "the gray area" to "keep things of the books" is pretty much the opposite. It is very likley that reacting to such emails takes a misbooking or a thing for which you can at worst get fired straight to a criminal level.
I for my part always walk away in business if somebody suggest me things in "the gray area". If i am somehow related to that person i would point it out during in a few words during the coffee break.
If colleagues/boss engage in such things i also walk away. Gives me the option later to deny knowing about it in detail.
a) IMHO the main danger is not the camera, but the microphone.
b) No, in my experience there is no way to educate users against stupidity.
c) The dangerous question is: can i use the password manager on a private phone to remember the password to my PC in the office? (yes - you can; i would even assume some peiople sysnc the note unecrypted into the cloud)
So is forbidding smartphones the right way? No, for some reasons:
a) it is nearly impossible to control - unless you make random searches
b) it places you in the responsibility to provide a safe storage for the phones
c) even simple phones have note functions and microphones. the last phone i had without a capability to access the microphone by software must have been around 2002.
So what to do:
a) dont use passwords alone for log-ins, but two-factor authentication
b) structure you infromation infrastructure in a way in which everybody has access to what he needs
c) Teach people to leave their smartphone turned off and in the locker of their desk in really confidential discussions or presentations
sometimes if deleted bad code keeps showing up in the repository you need to be careful and keep the wooden stick an the hammer ready to kill it in a man-to-code combat on the local harddrive of some developer.
Slashdot Mirror
Well. There are many things which "provide us with additional income from people who don't understand basic physics". Starts with bigot religious books and doesnt end with esoteric medicine.
Many of these are much more dangerous and/or profitable than a z-shaped pedal.
You can patent everything. You dont have to prove it works. Which is all right with me.
It wont work, so the chance they actually protect something by a patent which does not work is verly low. They just wasted their money.
There are a number of features which i love the note 2 for. Funnily the ultimate killer feature in the daily use of the note 2 is the idea that it vibrates shortly if you pick it up and there is a new message. This is so fucking brilliant and practical - you just can miss a new message with this. I also like the "flip over to turn silent" idea.
It looks like they're talking about doing stuff like including results from Google Maps in your web search results (whilst not doing the same for results from Bing Maps, etc.).
I dont think that that MS would allow to include bing results in the same way than google does with google maps.
Ultimatly, google searches googles databases. They should not be obliged to provide interfaces to other databases.
I just tested it. Googling for terms where they could get a advantage by placing their own products usually brings up competitions products first.
Using a webpage as intended (namely for machine-human interaction) should be allowed.
Writing programs which, withing the acceptable limits (honoring robots.txt and similar things) do an automated access for a purpose like searching etc. is obviuously also no problem
Using a program, which, with the *will* of the stupid lemmig (AKA Scriptkiddie/Anonymous follower) in front of the machine performs requests in a way which are not aligned with the intended puporse of the protocol, should obviously lead to criminal and civil persecution of the lemming (and its puppet master).
Writing a program which does such things against the will of the user is obviously criminal.
So, you fucking anonymous asshats: Yes - iff you collect millions of people who agree with you and they agree to personally load specific resources of a certain provider by manual interactions on the weppage, then yes, you are welciome to take down any webpage you like. But having a few hundred people who are mad that "can i haz the pornz for free" is not workign any more or that some company does not engage in activities which are considered illegal, or to support a alleged rapist, who claims to love free speach, but then buddies up with dictators?
Democracy works by gaining enough support, not by other things.
Allowing DDoS as political protest would also allow Amazon to DDos any webpage they dont like - if it has political claims. It would allow the all kind of opressive gouvernemnts ot do "political protests" agains oppositions webpages, and they could not even be tracked.
Recently my samsung galaxy note had some accident, so until it was repaired i was forced back to use my old nokia e63. Funny story: for email and podcasts (which is what matters to me on a mobile) i found that actually more productive, even after 2 years of using android phones/tablets, especially taking into account the battery life. I then checked in a store for the current symbian phone models, and i can honestly say: There is nothing in the smartphone world which matches the price/performance ratio of these.
They are cheap, well designed, have an os where the bugs have been fixed. The UI is sensible, i can take one in my hand and still use it without thinking.
I would rather buy a new symbian phone as a second cheap reliabe outdoor phone for sports etc. than a nokia lumia (even if these are no bad either).
If nokia would not have bragged so much about changing the platforms, the best thing they could have done would have been to put a decent kernel below and keep the API stable.
You know, switching programming languages a lot can sometimes mess up your memory about the specific syntax. However, i think i would get a simple loop done in at least 5-6 languages....
No. Tests are assuming that the other person will fail.
Sad, but true: there are a lot of people with a CS degree which code worse than i coded with 18y. There are people around who call themself programmers who are not able to get a single fucking thing straight in a way that looking at the layers of comments which sound like a "programmign for dummies" book put trough dadadodo. Some of applicants misestimate themself so grossly that it hurts, some may be desperate to get the job and polish their CV a little, and some are outright psychopathic liars whos first thought will be how to push the real work on interns which come and go and therefore wont take the credit.
Somebody with a complete education must be able to solve an undergrad problem without thinking much, just sytematically applying knowledfge and understanding.
In the same way in which anybody can expect that I (Phd in physics) will solve a decay equation correctly without trying aroung for hours or set up a equation of motion for a dynamical system without looking up for hours in textbooks (i am at least supposed to know where to find the solution), i expect that a self-announced programmer is able to write down somthing which applies a simple algorithmic principle to a small problem.
What i know about firearms:
You can use them to kill people
What i know about semiautomatic firearms with big magazines:
You can use them to kill many people
What i know about using weapons for self-defense:
For a criminal it does not make a difference if he is shot in the torso once, or 5 times in the head. So istead of mentally matrubating how much am M16 would help you there, turn on your brain. If everybody would wear a short-arm small-caliber weapon in his pocket that would be much more effective than some nutheads collecting an arsenal of semiautomatic weapons.
Yeah, because you know. The only thing which can stop a bad guy with a nuke, is a good guy with a nuke.
Imagine the filthy atheist communist liberal coming running madly from washington to take away your right to be a redneck, strapped to a nuke. I mean the nly thing which can stop him befor he reach the school to nuke it with homosexual propaganda is if you nuke him herically first.
Constutions are there to define the minimum rights for the citizens (rights which the govt can not take away), not the gouvernment. If a right for something is not in the contitution then it is not there.
If you greatly enjoy targeting practice with these, i am sure you dont mind if i experiment around with toxic chemicals (yea, just making some sarin to kill the mules in my garde) or nuclear materials in the house down the street. Or drive with 200km/h on the highway and kill some family which was stupid enough to be in my way? All things which some people might enjoy, which are luckily no the norm.
Then dont the FUCK sell automatic/semiautomatic weapons. Best would be: sell no weapons to people which are not police Second best option: sell weapons which are able to shoot once or twice. Make a mechanism which requires approximately 15sec reloading time. Make the ammunition in a way which pollutes the weapon so strongly that after 10 shots the weapon needs to be cleaned.
Shooting once or twice is still enough to make being a burglar or robber a quite unhealthy business in average (if you believe in the self-defense shit).
Yes, you will neither be able to fend of zombie-herds nor the chinese army, should they be interested in you.
If you believe that bearing weapon is you constitutional right, fine. But please show me the paragraph where it says "any weapon of your choice, including weapons which were designed for warfare between military". Why don't you stack chemical weapons or nuclear weapons at home? Could be useful if you are overrun by atheists.
After all, if these little boxes can simply stream from powerful servers, how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up?"
By *not* streaming from servers. I like the idea of turning a thing on and start to play, even if the service has gone out of bussiness.
a) Keyboard quality
b) Thinklight led to shine on the keyboard (very usefull if you have read some doument or some note on paper)
c) trackstick
If they keep these features, i may buy another one (Bought used X21, X31, X41tablet (the battery lifes sucks)).
Internet dating is a great thing. Call me a fucking arrogant asshole, if you like. Some people dont realize that what follows is my honest opinion:
Yes, in fact the problem is not finding the people looking for a date. My procedure for the last time i looked for somebody (together for four years now) has been the following:
(1) Throw out everybody who has more than one education level difference. Same education level preferred.
(2) Remove women from set who use sterotypical language
(3) Remove women from set who speak less than 2 language fluently and understand less than 3 languages
(4) Technical/Scientifical Jobs preferred
Why, o why? I made the experience that having a Phd in physics while the partner struggles to finish a bachelor in a quite simple and non-demanding subject is an indicator for problems to come, even if you may love each other otherwise. So is a speed difference in reading of a factor of about 5 or more. Beyond some self-esteem issues of the partner:
1) Mobility. Its better if both persons have the same degree of mobility
2) similar income. Strongly strongly different incomes mean that the person with the lower income will probably follow the peroson with thhe higher income (since it is economically reasonable), making the situation usually even worse
3) Similar wordview. Do i really want to have a future wife with whom i will have to discuss wether evolution of creation is correct? Do I really want to have a fight about the ideals? Do i really, really want that my future wife has books in the bookshelf which classify as cheap esoteric bullshit which I would feels needs to be thrown in the thrash? The problem is less that the current worldvie may be different, but a scientific education strongly increases the bullshit filter (AKA scepticism) you have against various forms of political and religious propaganda. And believe me - its annouying to explain the problems over and over.
4) Similar lifestyle and ideals. Living in a big house in front of a city, going everyday to the same work for 30 years by travelling one our by car in one direction is not my lifestyle. "Settling down" means for me more something like "Settling down for 10 years". So no, somebody who expects me to settle down for 30 years may have some severe - unsolvable - conflicts with me.
So that is how i met my current significant other and i cant complain.
and get fired
dont wear the dosimeter in a nuclear facility ... and get fired
dont wear prtective gloves while working on certain tasks ... and get fired
dont wear breathing masks when working with some chemicals ... and get fired
dont go to health tests when working as a cook ... and get fired
I kind of expected a comment like this, since i actually rememberd that there have been a big number of experimental scripting interfaces in the browsers of the 90s...
But i did no remember explicitely that perl was among these.
Iff you ever do something within the grey area, then do so without witnesses. Leaving an email trail that somthing is done in "the gray area" to "keep things of the books" is pretty much the opposite. It is very likley that reacting to such emails takes a misbooking or a thing for which you can at worst get fired straight to a criminal level.
I for my part always walk away in business if somebody suggest me things in "the gray area". If i am somehow related to that person i would point it out during in a few words during the coffee break.
If colleagues/boss engage in such things i also walk away. Gives me the option later to deny knowing about it in detail.
a) IMHO the main danger is not the camera, but the microphone.
b) No, in my experience there is no way to educate users against stupidity.
c) The dangerous question is: can i use the password manager on a private phone to remember the password to my PC in the office? (yes - you can; i would even assume some peiople sysnc the note unecrypted into the cloud)
So is forbidding smartphones the right way? No, for some reasons:
a) it is nearly impossible to control - unless you make random searches
b) it places you in the responsibility to provide a safe storage for the phones
c) even simple phones have note functions and microphones. the last phone i had without a capability to access the microphone by software must have been around 2002.
So what to do:
a) dont use passwords alone for log-ins, but two-factor authentication
b) structure you infromation infrastructure in a way in which everybody has access to what he needs
c) Teach people to leave their smartphone turned off and in the locker of their desk in really confidential discussions or presentations
My personal experience:
Germany: nope
Japan: nope
At first i read: you can control windows by your 8 eyes. But then i realized i am not a spider.
sometimes if deleted bad code keeps showing up in the repository you need to be careful and keep the wooden stick an the hammer ready to kill it in a man-to-code combat on the local harddrive of some developer.
not a good idea. Ther was maybe already a lawsuit or there may be one.
If you, without tons of good proof, delay bringing the thing to market, and are sued, you are fucked.
Realistically speaking: Better settle cases of scientific misconduct silently or completely anonymous.
Well. That is what senior author positions on papers are for.