You know, ego surfing isn't anywhere near as fun when you can't even find your own website. Until their indexing database is more developed, it's kinda the equivalent of waiting for waves in a public pool.
I wonder if instead of webmasters throwing out meaningless pride behind their Google pagerank we might soon see bragging rights to "Well, Cuil found my site on such & such date"
My first job out of college was on the B-2, specifically on the flight control box. Despite what C/C++ detractors might say, JOVIAL as I saw it in use was vastly inferior to nearly any other language I've ever used. Compiler bugs were known but never fixed. The minuscule market for JOVIAL applications meant limited or no choice in compilers or tools. The lack of coders meant that you could not attract personnel and those you had were incentivized to get the heck out so as not to become unemployable.
Frankly, the actual language you use on a project is almost (not quite, but almost) an afterthought compared to the other factors of toolsets and talent pool.
Er, I think it was Tom Sawyer. Huck Finn was too busy traveling down the Mississippi...
which he threw a silver dollar across before becoming president.
You wanna play a tape!? What is the world coming to? Any real geek would slap together a program that passes the Turing test, hook it to a speech synthesizer, and have it chat away with the telemarketer. And he'd do it in Perl or LISP!
Shame on you! You should turn in your pocket protector.
My immediate thought was relabling one of these so it appeared to be a non-WiFi card. Then, if one could handle the software/virus end of it to force the device to transmit stuff without the owner's knowledge, you would be able to observe and/or steal any and all images from a camera or hijack a cellphone that used it, etc.
You can go to http://greatfirewallofchina.org/test and test if a specific URL is censored by China (they use a remote server and have it try to make an outbound connection). The site is up and down at the moment due to a mention on Fark.com, but I was able test a few URLs:
http://slashdot.org/ - not blocked when I tested, but periodically blocked
http://cnn.com/ - not blocked at the moment, but periodically blocked
This smacks of political scare tactics, albeit in the best possible way. It reminds me of the classic case where a mayor needs money for long term infrastructure needs for the city, but can't sign on any taxpayers for something as unsexy as better sewers. What does he do? He budgets the sewers and threatens to close some firehouses, daring anyone to call his bluff.
NASA doesn't have any firehouses to close, so the only way they'll be able to preserve their core missions against the budget axe is to invent one. If it takes a little bit of bureaucratic dirty tricks to keep basic science and the unmanned probe programs going instead of dying on the altar of a directionless manned program, I say more power to them.
I work for a Big Honkin' Aerospace Company and have had problems for the past few years with upgrading cell phone. In addition to not having any cells in classified areas (no big deal - we have "leave your phone here' boxes outside every lab) we also aren't allowed to have a camera inside company buildings (due to trade secret issues). That extends to camera phones and PDAs. As a result, you're stuck picking the one token phone at the dealer that is cameraless.
I'm glad somebody's getting on board with this, although I wonder if it will become a real trend or not. After all, it's a lot easier for a Marketing department to pitch bells and whistles features than sell a simple product that works well. We'll just have to see how it goes...
First, I know it's everyone's favorite hobby, but don't flame the editors on this. I submitted the story and to the best of my knowledge, they posted it as I submitted it. If there was an error (see below) and you want to flame anyone, fire on me, not them (and, no, I don't want to hear any "That's what editors are for" whining. It's great if an editor catches a mistake by an author, but the responsibility for any work rests on the author).
Second, was the story corrected at some point or something? I see "Camouflage" on the story and I see "Camouflage" at the awards page and I see "Camouflage" at Webster's. Is your concern with "Camouflage," or was there another (incorrect) spelling on the original piece? This is driving me nuts. Please let me know. Thanks.
if you gave one of these things to one of the homeless guys who stand on the street and talk to unseen people, they would cease to look crazy
Washington, D.C. - Today the Bush administration announced the first major increase in public spending for the mentally ill since Ronald Reagan slashed psychiatric care for indigents in the 1980s. Under the new program, Medicare will be expanded such that every American who is diagnosed with schizophrenia will be issued with a Bluetooth headset to allow them to speak to the voices in their heads more efficiently. In a surprising move, the Administration has budgetted $100.00 for each of the 298 million U.S. residents, regardless of citizenship status.
In a related story, Halliburton (symobl:HAL) has announced that it will be making unsolicited takeover bids for Motorola (MOT) and Jabra, major players in the Bluetooth handset field.
I do indeed believe that once someone has set out to debunk something, that is, state in certainty that it is false, of course they have the burden of proof.
I agree with you there if there is a substantial body of proof proving the belief in the first place. I agree that under those circumnstances one must point for point disprove (or at least cast doubt upon) all the evidence brought forward to advocate the original claim. Thus, if the advocates of Intelligent Design had dug up a well documented series of fossils that were reliably dated (via carbon dating, sedimentary analysis, and other means) that flew in the face of our current understanding of how life came to be on earth, then they would have had a solid case for questioning (if not disproving yet) Evolution. In fact, if that were to occur the Biological community would be the first to embrace the evidence and try to figure out what the heck it means.
On the other hand, claims made by advocates of the Philadelphia Experiment can't be given the same weight as those advocating Evolution. If Darwin were still around to recant his theory, you'd still have to explain away fossil evidence, observations about species development, etc. to shoot down Evolution (Heck, Galileo recanted under duress but his work still stands). All we have to go on for the Philadelphia Experiment, though, is a second hand report of rambling letters from an essentially anonymous source. When the author retracts even that, the case fails utterly. In a court of law, the case would be dismissed for lack of evidence.
I was wondering: Are taking issue merely with the data included in Straight Dope's article or do you honestly feel that the burden of proof for something like this is on the debunker rather than on the person that made the original claim?
Please understand, no flames are intended here and I am not attempting to bash you on this. It's just that your comment can be read either way. Personally, I feel that outlandish claims require solid evidence and I feel that the Straight Dope piece (where the main advocate of the original claim backs down) more than meets the bill.
Something that I've always intended to do (but only did in my most recent position) is to write my resignation letter on the first day of work. It's very generic ("This letter serves as formal notice of resignation from , effective two calendar weeks from the above date") and I keep it in an envelope in my Franklin labeled "Nuclear Option." The idea is that it puts the job in perspective - it's only a job and not worth comprimising my health or scruples. I will eventually leave it anyway (perhaps in a year, perhaps with retirement - who knows?), so it's not worth making the mistake that my world will come crashing down if I do.
Having the option of leaving has been enough to soothe me past some rough spots, even though I never chose to exercise that option. It reminds me that I'm the only one who can control (and the only one responsible for) my life.
You might consider doing this with your new position, too.
I know it can be a bit irksome to have this sort of thing happen, but the CIO is obviously just taking a defensive posture, probably because of earlier bad experience. Although the notion that a sabatour would wait until giving notice is in itself absurd, you can't really blame the guy. Now you need to be a professional again and not take it personally.
My advice - go back into work (as an escorted visitor if necesarry) and shake hands and thank everyone you can find for working with you. If not able to do it in person, send thank you cards (and be damn sure to include the CIO). This is a small business and taking these steps will make it sure that everyone knows you're not burning bridges.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, ego surfing isn't anywhere near as fun when you can't even find your own website. Until their indexing database is more developed, it's kinda the equivalent of waiting for waves in a public pool. I wonder if instead of webmasters throwing out meaningless pride behind their Google pagerank we might soon see bragging rights to "Well, Cuil found my site on such & such date"
Frankly, the actual language you use on a project is almost (not quite, but almost) an afterthought compared to the other factors of toolsets and talent pool.
Er, I think it was Tom Sawyer. Huck Finn was too busy traveling down the Mississippi... which he threw a silver dollar across before becoming president.
You wanna play a tape!? What is the world coming to? Any real geek would slap together a program that passes the Turing test, hook it to a speech synthesizer, and have it chat away with the telemarketer. And he'd do it in Perl or LISP!
Shame on you! You should turn in your pocket protector.
Damn kids. Stay off my lawn!
My immediate thought was relabling one of these so it appeared to be a non-WiFi card. Then, if one could handle the software/virus end of it to force the device to transmit stuff without the owner's knowledge, you would be able to observe and/or steal any and all images from a camera or hijack a cellphone that used it, etc.
Or is it "spelcheck"?
NASA doesn't have any firehouses to close, so the only way they'll be able to preserve their core missions against the budget axe is to invent one. If it takes a little bit of bureaucratic dirty tricks to keep basic science and the unmanned probe programs going instead of dying on the altar of a directionless manned program, I say more power to them.
(although, I hear Franklin Mint is coming out with an Intel vs. Motorola "CPU Civil War" set).
Enjoy!
I work for a Big Honkin' Aerospace Company and have had problems for the past few years with upgrading cell phone. In addition to not having any cells in classified areas (no big deal - we have "leave your phone here' boxes outside every lab) we also aren't allowed to have a camera inside company buildings (due to trade secret issues). That extends to camera phones and PDAs. As a result, you're stuck picking the one token phone at the dealer that is cameraless.
I'm glad somebody's getting on board with this, although I wonder if it will become a real trend or not. After all, it's a lot easier for a Marketing department to pitch bells and whistles features than sell a simple product that works well. We'll just have to see how it goes...
Like "How many roads must a man travel down?," right?
Um, 42?
This is Slashdot, people. This is an experience that is absoultely unrelated to anyone that views this website.
I mean, I only got 8 tickets to graduation. You think gram ranks above the guys from the local LINUX group and my WoW guild?
Second, was the story corrected at some point or something? I see "Camouflage" on the story and I see "Camouflage" at the awards page and I see "Camouflage" at Webster's. Is your concern with "Camouflage," or was there another (incorrect) spelling on the original piece? This is driving me nuts. Please let me know. Thanks.
Heck, write the damn thing in COBOL. After all, what better language to use than one that refuses to die despite every best effort to kill it?
Washington, D.C. - Today the Bush administration announced the first major increase in public spending for the mentally ill since Ronald Reagan slashed psychiatric care for indigents in the 1980s. Under the new program, Medicare will be expanded such that every American who is diagnosed with schizophrenia will be issued with a Bluetooth headset to allow them to speak to the voices in their heads more efficiently. In a surprising move, the Administration has budgetted $100.00 for each of the 298 million U.S. residents, regardless of citizenship status.
In a related story, Halliburton (symobl:HAL) has announced that it will be making unsolicited takeover bids for Motorola (MOT) and Jabra, major players in the Bluetooth handset field.
This, of course, presupposes the existence of a civilized society in the first place.
Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_experime nt#Discussion_and_debate_of_the_story as well.
I agree with you there if there is a substantial body of proof proving the belief in the first place. I agree that under those circumnstances one must point for point disprove (or at least cast doubt upon) all the evidence brought forward to advocate the original claim. Thus, if the advocates of Intelligent Design had dug up a well documented series of fossils that were reliably dated (via carbon dating, sedimentary analysis, and other means) that flew in the face of our current understanding of how life came to be on earth, then they would have had a solid case for questioning (if not disproving yet) Evolution. In fact, if that were to occur the Biological community would be the first to embrace the evidence and try to figure out what the heck it means.
On the other hand, claims made by advocates of the Philadelphia Experiment can't be given the same weight as those advocating Evolution. If Darwin were still around to recant his theory, you'd still have to explain away fossil evidence, observations about species development, etc. to shoot down Evolution (Heck, Galileo recanted under duress but his work still stands). All we have to go on for the Philadelphia Experiment, though, is a second hand report of rambling letters from an essentially anonymous source. When the author retracts even that, the case fails utterly. In a court of law, the case would be dismissed for lack of evidence.
Please understand, no flames are intended here and I am not attempting to bash you on this. It's just that your comment can be read either way. Personally, I feel that outlandish claims require solid evidence and I feel that the Straight Dope piece (where the main advocate of the original claim backs down) more than meets the bill.
One hopes that this would occur with the rest of the craft attached. Otherwise, you'll only be able to sell one way fares, I suppose.
Enough do that the Straight Dope debunked it here.
Having the option of leaving has been enough to soothe me past some rough spots, even though I never chose to exercise that option. It reminds me that I'm the only one who can control (and the only one responsible for) my life.
You might consider doing this with your new position, too.
My advice - go back into work (as an escorted visitor if necesarry) and shake hands and thank everyone you can find for working with you. If not able to do it in person, send thank you cards (and be damn sure to include the CIO). This is a small business and taking these steps will make it sure that everyone knows you're not burning bridges.