Also, detection? According to the news, none of the regular virus scanners are detecting this new variant, and of course once they are able to detect this one (WannaCry is now reliably detected) the next variant is released into the wild. But any process that scans for known vulnerable services should be suspect, as should any process that reads and then modifies a large number of files, especially in locations like the user folder.
If you have to be at the top to make a meaningful decision, move on!
Good advice if I ever heard it. It's even making its way into business administration textbooks, with numerous studies citing "agency" (having some autonomy in your work including being able to make decisions) as a major factor in job satisfaction.
Diving is similar to hiking in that respect, you can easily do it for a week or longer and not be bored. Even if you dive the same site twice, the experience is still going to be different. Most people I know who take a week off for diving try and squeeze as many dives in as possible. As for looking forward to going back home, I usually feel that fater a week away, but after 2 weeks I've settled into a new routine and I'll prefer to stick around even longer.
No. Don't call it a 2 by 4 if it isn't actually 2" by 4". You know what, just switch to metric already. If I buy a 23x44 it actually has those dimensions. (And yeah, the range of available sizes is weird, probably because the dimensions are simply the old inch sizes converted to mm)
Sigh. Regular trains either service small stations meaning that they take ages to travel longer distances, or they only stop at major stations which means that you first have to travel to a major station in order to take advantage of them (adding more time as you change trains)
Let me draw you a picture:
Regular trains:
[local train from Two Horse Town] --- stop --- stop --- stop --- stop --- stop ---- [change to intercity at Big City] ------ stop ------ stop ----- [change to local at Mega City] --- stop --- stop --- stop --- [arriving at final destination in Shitface gulch]
Hyperloop:
[enter pod at Two Horse Town] --- zooooooooooooooooooooooooom --- [arrive at Shitface Gulch]
See how that works?
That's where hyperloop could save on travel time tremendously: if there actually is a continuous network, you wouldn't have to slow down, stop, and accelerate at each intermediate station like a regular train; you could zoom flat out to your destination. It would also mean that you could presumably build a hyperloop station at every two horse town along the way, no need for those people to travel to a major town, again cutting a lot of travel time. Provided that switching tubes will be possible, and economically feasible.
This. Usually when two companies merge, it means they can reduce cost and actually lower prices. But when telcos merge, it's because they don't want to compete anymore and instead create a de facto monopoly in certain geographic regions. It's happening here in the Netherlands as well. New Fiber hookups went from 250k a year to 20k a year after KPN (a large telco) bought the company that rolls out most of the fiber. They decided it was going to be cheaper to "upgrade" their existing DSL network, but they weren't too pleased with the competition from superior fiber service, so they killed the fiber company.
We still have a decent choice mostly because almost every home here has both phone and cable tv lines coming in, meaning there's always at least two providers to choose from. At the moment I can still get 500mb fiber for about €60 a month, and we just got a new law that states customers must be allowed to use their own equipment. But now the phone and cable companies are starting to eye each other, and the business competition watchdog is asleep at the wheel. In half a decade we may have "caught up" with the us.
How is that even legal? I wouldn't want to cut a neighbour's internet connection, but if the company just strung a cable through my yard, I'd be sorely tempted to cut it. Or have a little accident with the lawn mower.
Some European fashion retailers have been doing this for a good while, and still manage to turn a profit. In fact free returns and only paying for the items you keep is starting to become the norm here.
I am sure that this practice of taking a lot of returns, and having to receive and repackage them, eats into the profits of retailers a bit, but they make it up in volume: hassle and cost of returns has been one of the biggest problems that consumers had when mail ordering apparel. Assume those costs and you'll sell more, which means you will have more clout when negotiating with fashion labels, which is extremely important. A boutique owner once told me that selling clothes is the easy part, almost anyone can do that. The hard part is to make a decent profit, and you do that when buying your stock. Which involves some tough negotiating.
People pay to have ads aired, so they have a reasonable expectation that those ads are shown as is (or not shown at all, in which case they shouldn't be charged either). In the case of entertainment, it's the viewer who both pays for the content and decides what filters to apply.
And so should governments, who are there for the people rather than the studios. Up until recently our government did exactly that. The rule was: if you are not offering your content here (in a more or less timely manner, and under reasonable terms), then people are free to pirate it; the government would not prosecute downloaders. Seems like a great way to exert some pressure on the studios on behalf of the populace.
It should be both novel and non-obvious. And it's the solution that should be novel, you shouldn't get a patent for an obvious solution to a novel problem either.
That also works for rich or otherwise successful people. The word for nutty rich or super-smart folks is "eccentric" I suspect that a great many ordinary people have pretty weird quirks and habits too; the difference is that we never hear about them.
You don't get billions for a good idea, or for implementing that idea. You get billions for building company out of it, raising capital, doing marketing, building a solid customer base, whipping up some hype, hiring the right kind of staff, finding effective managers and appointing a good board, and have the business smarts (or the right people) to scale your service up as more people sign on. Then, when you have millions of eyeballs and a company able to offer your service in a reliable and sustainable manner, then you will have buyers knocking on the door with billions in their pockets.
You still need a good idea, a bit of luck, and decent timing. But that's just the start of it.
There's three potential buyers for Slack: the kind that will continue to offer the service for free while raping your data six ways from Sunday, and the kind that will start injecting ads or start charging an already captive audience for the service. The third kind is the company who will do both.
Companies who have come to depend on Slack will be more or less forced to pay whatever the new owners charge. That worked out rather well for Yammer when they started: offer it for free to employees, then start charging companies when they came to depend on it (or needed the premium admin functions to regain some manner of control). A colleague of mine compared it to Mafia tactics.
Just you wait. I bet a PHB is reading this right now, thinking: "If those coders get paid more, they must be better. So it must be the spaces that makes them better. I should go and change our coding standards". And then demand that you actually use the space bar to produce the spaces, in case you're still sneaking tabs in there somehow.
Actually, we do. Copying content used to be the norm; the notion that copying cultural works is not allowed is an artificial construct, and a very recent one at that. And the reason that artists (these days: studios) were granted a monopoly on their works wasn't for their direct benefit; allowing them to profit from copies was to encourage more creation and the spread of those works to the public In other words, copyright exists to benefit the public, not the artists. It aims to create abundance, not to foster artificial scarcity.
I know very few people who pirate stuff to save a buck, most of them can easily afford to pay for what they take. They do so because of convenience, or because the "legal" content is so encumbered with DRM that it becomes unusable, or because some content simply isn't made available to them. Another./ poster once claimed that "pirates are simply unserved customers", and I think that's spot on in many cases. If studios misuse copyright to create an artificial scarcity, then it's them breaking the social contract, not us pirates.
Yes, "nothing controversial" in this context means topics that don't result in an angry mob with masks, torches and pitchforks. So yeah, speakers affiliated with "alt-right/conservative" institutions will not be invited, while "progressive" speakers get a pass. Unless conservative students organise their own angry mobs. A course I wouldn't ever recommend (and certainly don't want to imply that there shouldn't be discussions on LGBT or other diversity issues). Though I don't think that's very likely to happen. This is something the left has always understood far better than the right: administrators hate dealing with trouble of this kind, and will go out of their way to avoid it. Especially if the guy in charge isn't a big fan of the topic in question either; in that case a hint of trouble provides the perfect excuse to ban undesirable opinions on grounds of public safety. Over here, right wing marches often got cancelled after a mere announcement by Antifa on their intention to stage a counter-demo.
It's sad that it had to come to this. I do think that universities carry most of the blame for the current situation, given their lack of action against the disruption of classes and events. From the get go, their stance should have been that there can be only one answer to students who persist in denying the free exchange of ideas on campus: expulsion. And if universities are unwilling or unable to guarantee freedom to exchange ideas, then it's good that the government steps in.
This bill penalises universities for giving in to protesters. The idea perhaps being that this will force them to take action against those protesters. But I think you may well be right, given how similar rules have worked out in the past: universities will instead ensure that nothing controversial takes place to begin with.
Will you stand up for your fellow man with equal zeal if it's a case of, say, a peaceful right wing protester being attacked by masked "antifascists"? Hypothetically speaking of course, because we all know that this never happens in real life.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not a home invasion if the intruder presents himself as a delivery man / pizza guy, and you subsequently open the door.
Also, detection? According to the news, none of the regular virus scanners are detecting this new variant, and of course once they are able to detect this one (WannaCry is now reliably detected) the next variant is released into the wild. But any process that scans for known vulnerable services should be suspect, as should any process that reads and then modifies a large number of files, especially in locations like the user folder.
If you have to be at the top to make a meaningful decision, move on!
Good advice if I ever heard it. It's even making its way into business administration textbooks, with numerous studies citing "agency" (having some autonomy in your work including being able to make decisions) as a major factor in job satisfaction.
Once and for all!
Diving is similar to hiking in that respect, you can easily do it for a week or longer and not be bored. Even if you dive the same site twice, the experience is still going to be different. Most people I know who take a week off for diving try and squeeze as many dives in as possible. As for looking forward to going back home, I usually feel that fater a week away, but after 2 weeks I've settled into a new routine and I'll prefer to stick around even longer.
No. Don't call it a 2 by 4 if it isn't actually 2" by 4". You know what, just switch to metric already. If I buy a 23x44 it actually has those dimensions. (And yeah, the range of available sizes is weird, probably because the dimensions are simply the old inch sizes converted to mm)
Sigh. Regular trains either service small stations meaning that they take ages to travel longer distances, or they only stop at major stations which means that you first have to travel to a major station in order to take advantage of them (adding more time as you change trains)
Let me draw you a picture:
Regular trains:
[local train from Two Horse Town] --- stop --- stop --- stop --- stop --- stop ---- [change to intercity at Big City] ------ stop ------ stop ----- [change to local at Mega City] --- stop --- stop --- stop --- [arriving at final destination in Shitface gulch]
Hyperloop:
[enter pod at Two Horse Town] --- zooooooooooooooooooooooooom --- [arrive at Shitface Gulch]
See how that works?
That's where hyperloop could save on travel time tremendously: if there actually is a continuous network, you wouldn't have to slow down, stop, and accelerate at each intermediate station like a regular train; you could zoom flat out to your destination. It would also mean that you could presumably build a hyperloop station at every two horse town along the way, no need for those people to travel to a major town, again cutting a lot of travel time. Provided that switching tubes will be possible, and economically feasible.
This. Usually when two companies merge, it means they can reduce cost and actually lower prices. But when telcos merge, it's because they don't want to compete anymore and instead create a de facto monopoly in certain geographic regions. It's happening here in the Netherlands as well. New Fiber hookups went from 250k a year to 20k a year after KPN (a large telco) bought the company that rolls out most of the fiber. They decided it was going to be cheaper to "upgrade" their existing DSL network, but they weren't too pleased with the competition from superior fiber service, so they killed the fiber company.
We still have a decent choice mostly because almost every home here has both phone and cable tv lines coming in, meaning there's always at least two providers to choose from. At the moment I can still get 500mb fiber for about €60 a month, and we just got a new law that states customers must be allowed to use their own equipment. But now the phone and cable companies are starting to eye each other, and the business competition watchdog is asleep at the wheel. In half a decade we may have "caught up" with the us.
How is that even legal? I wouldn't want to cut a neighbour's internet connection, but if the company just strung a cable through my yard, I'd be sorely tempted to cut it. Or have a little accident with the lawn mower.
Some European fashion retailers have been doing this for a good while, and still manage to turn a profit. In fact free returns and only paying for the items you keep is starting to become the norm here.
I am sure that this practice of taking a lot of returns, and having to receive and repackage them, eats into the profits of retailers a bit, but they make it up in volume: hassle and cost of returns has been one of the biggest problems that consumers had when mail ordering apparel. Assume those costs and you'll sell more, which means you will have more clout when negotiating with fashion labels, which is extremely important. A boutique owner once told me that selling clothes is the easy part, almost anyone can do that. The hard part is to make a decent profit, and you do that when buying your stock. Which involves some tough negotiating.
People pay to have ads aired, so they have a reasonable expectation that those ads are shown as is (or not shown at all, in which case they shouldn't be charged either). In the case of entertainment, it's the viewer who both pays for the content and decides what filters to apply.
Pirates refused the bullshit terms.
And so should governments, who are there for the people rather than the studios. Up until recently our government did exactly that. The rule was: if you are not offering your content here (in a more or less timely manner, and under reasonable terms), then people are free to pirate it; the government would not prosecute downloaders. Seems like a great way to exert some pressure on the studios on behalf of the populace.
It should be both novel and non-obvious. And it's the solution that should be novel, you shouldn't get a patent for an obvious solution to a novel problem either.
The real question is how this is even worthy of a patent.
That also works for rich or otherwise successful people. The word for nutty rich or super-smart folks is "eccentric" I suspect that a great many ordinary people have pretty weird quirks and habits too; the difference is that we never hear about them.
You don't get billions for a good idea, or for implementing that idea. You get billions for building company out of it, raising capital, doing marketing, building a solid customer base, whipping up some hype, hiring the right kind of staff, finding effective managers and appointing a good board, and have the business smarts (or the right people) to scale your service up as more people sign on. Then, when you have millions of eyeballs and a company able to offer your service in a reliable and sustainable manner, then you will have buyers knocking on the door with billions in their pockets.
You still need a good idea, a bit of luck, and decent timing. But that's just the start of it.
There's three potential buyers for Slack: the kind that will continue to offer the service for free while raping your data six ways from Sunday, and the kind that will start injecting ads or start charging an already captive audience for the service. The third kind is the company who will do both.
Companies who have come to depend on Slack will be more or less forced to pay whatever the new owners charge. That worked out rather well for Yammer when they started: offer it for free to employees, then start charging companies when they came to depend on it (or needed the premium admin functions to regain some manner of control). A colleague of mine compared it to Mafia tactics.
Just you wait. I bet a PHB is reading this right now, thinking: "If those coders get paid more, they must be better. So it must be the spaces that makes them better. I should go and change our coding standards". And then demand that you actually use the space bar to produce the spaces, in case you're still sneaking tabs in there somehow.
Actually, we do. Copying content used to be the norm; the notion that copying cultural works is not allowed is an artificial construct, and a very recent one at that. And the reason that artists (these days: studios) were granted a monopoly on their works wasn't for their direct benefit; allowing them to profit from copies was to encourage more creation and the spread of those works to the public In other words, copyright exists to benefit the public, not the artists. It aims to create abundance, not to foster artificial scarcity.
./ poster once claimed that "pirates are simply unserved customers", and I think that's spot on in many cases. If studios misuse copyright to create an artificial scarcity, then it's them breaking the social contract, not us pirates.
I know very few people who pirate stuff to save a buck, most of them can easily afford to pay for what they take. They do so because of convenience, or because the "legal" content is so encumbered with DRM that it becomes unusable, or because some content simply isn't made available to them. Another
Yes, "nothing controversial" in this context means topics that don't result in an angry mob with masks, torches and pitchforks. So yeah, speakers affiliated with "alt-right/conservative" institutions will not be invited, while "progressive" speakers get a pass. Unless conservative students organise their own angry mobs. A course I wouldn't ever recommend (and certainly don't want to imply that there shouldn't be discussions on LGBT or other diversity issues). Though I don't think that's very likely to happen. This is something the left has always understood far better than the right: administrators hate dealing with trouble of this kind, and will go out of their way to avoid it. Especially if the guy in charge isn't a big fan of the topic in question either; in that case a hint of trouble provides the perfect excuse to ban undesirable opinions on grounds of public safety. Over here, right wing marches often got cancelled after a mere announcement by Antifa on their intention to stage a counter-demo.
It's sad that it had to come to this. I do think that universities carry most of the blame for the current situation, given their lack of action against the disruption of classes and events. From the get go, their stance should have been that there can be only one answer to students who persist in denying the free exchange of ideas on campus: expulsion. And if universities are unwilling or unable to guarantee freedom to exchange ideas, then it's good that the government steps in.
This bill penalises universities for giving in to protesters. The idea perhaps being that this will force them to take action against those protesters. But I think you may well be right, given how similar rules have worked out in the past: universities will instead ensure that nothing controversial takes place to begin with.
Will you stand up for your fellow man with equal zeal if it's a case of, say, a peaceful right wing protester being attacked by masked "antifascists"? Hypothetically speaking of course, because we all know that this never happens in real life.
I was reminded of the 1-X Robot from Futurama.
Don't be afraid of a few germs.