Fuck the NSA, CIA, FBI, and everyone else that finds security issues and keeps them private. They are the problem, not Microsoft.
MS is correct in noting that both the TLAs and the users who failed to apply the patch share some of the blame. However, at least an equal share of the blame lies with MS for the appalling number of serious bugs that Windows has. While it is impossible to write bug-free code many security bugs in Linux and Macs typically require existing user-level access to the machine which makes them much less serious. Those that do allow remote access are rare enough that they are huge news, not part of a typical monthly patch cycle.
So as I see it the blame goes three ways: MS for a bad security model for Windows; the TLAs for hiding the flaw after they spotted it and users who don't apply updates regularly when they should know how bug-ridden Windows is.
Does Theresa May aspire to be elected to an office?
Yes, she does but only for Member of Parliament, NOT Prime Minister. The position of PM is not an elected one but an appointed one. The reigning monarch chooses the PM but by long-standing tradition always picks the leader of the party with a majority of seats in the commons. The PM remains in office until either they step down or they are fired by the monarch. They may also have to step down if they lose a confidence motion but I'm not sure whether that is legally binding or whether it just means that they have lost the ability to govern so they always do step down.
So she really is not a "candidate for PM" but just a leader of her party who is seeking re-election and, if her party gets enough seats, she will be appointed PM and command enough support in the commons to be able to hold the position.
You have some good points but all of these are things that are likely to become less important with time. Costs to implement decrease as market volume builds. Vendors get more expertise with the technology and are less likely to screw up. Cheaper implementations mean it is possible to add all the functionality to more/all ports etc.
Unless there is something which prevents the implementation costs reducing - usually this is some patent/proprietary thing like it was with Firewire - I'd be surprised if there is not a slow shift over to the new connector probably driven by the faster-charging speeds for mobile devices.
If your device isn't USB-C, you either buy a tiny adapter for about 2-3 pound...
If I wanted to carry around bags of dongles everywhere I go I would have stuck with a Mac. I don't mind the odd adapter for less frequent/likely usage cases but I want a laptop which has most of the common ports built in.
The labs were never zero weight nor have I heard of anywhere in any country where they are zero. We were talking about assignments i.e. questions students take home to practice the material not a lab where they are learning completely different skills on experimental techniques.
That the US is going to see significantly more brain drain in the years to come does not seem to me like a very controversial prediction.
That's very probably true but I very much doubt it will be to France where at least ~15 years ago you used to pay over 50% of your income in tax, academic salaries were far lower than the US and Canada and the VAT/sales tax is 20%. There are many non-financial advantages such as the food, country, culture, people etc. but while I loved all of that when I lived there I've noticed that Americans seem to care quite a bit more about the financial side and on the US scale the politics is probably somewhere left of what they would call communism (although it's actually not much to the left of much of Europe) so I doubt France will be a top choice of destination.
The problem is that students do not do homework anymore and almost never on time.
To get around that I use the Moodle online quiz system. It has a merciless timer and I make no exceptions to the deadline although I do drop the lowest mark for illnesses etc. as well as provide two "mock exam" assignments which act as practice for the midterm and final. The questions I wrote usually use randomized numbers so while they can copy the method from a friend they at least have to do the calculation themselves. I also give the assignments very little weight - I actually tried zero (which how it was in the UK when I was an undergrad) but nobody did the assignments so I have it pegged at 5% which is enough that students will do them but without penalizing their grade if they struggle to learn a particular topic and still ensuring that the exams carry all the real assessment weight.
If written material were provided in addition to the video that would be great
I always do that simply because it is not possible to communicate all the material in a video without making it so long that nobody would ever watch it! The other advantage of this is that after improving the written material a few times it got to the point where I no longer suggest a textbook which saves the students ~$200 each and is vastly more convenient for them since I make it available as an unencumbered PDF...which also had the added benefit that more of them read it so it was win-win-win!
Speaking as a physics professor who has tried many of these new techniques - I've done video lectures which are up on YouTube, in-class tutorials, clickers etc. - I get really annoyed by this type of hyperbolic promotions of them. Technology has indeed given us some better ways of doing things and in that the OP is right that we should explore and use them. However, somethings are best taught in the more traditional lecture format and frankly, when I was a student myself we were all supposed to read around the subject - not just limited to reading the textbook but other books too - as well as attend the lecture so this is hardly a "new idea".
In particular one of the things I have noticed with many of these new techniques is that they communicate far less information and those using them often have to take material out of a syllabus. They then compare this to the original lecture and it is no surprise that they find that students learn the material better. However if the original lecture format was repeated with the same reduced syllabus and far more time on each topic I expect that this too would get better results if for no other reason than students have less to revise for the exam.
So please let's not start the irresponsible hype that old lectures are dead just because we have an arsenal of new techniques. Some of these techniques may have disadvantages over the "old" lecture style particularly when it comes to the amount of material covered which, for a subject like physics, is extremely important because it has a more linear nature until you get to the final undergrad year. Plus some of the new techniques are grossly unfair since they award marks for a group and not individuals which means it can be heavily influenced by how lucky you are with your group members.
Is there actionable intelligence to back up this ban...
Even if there is actionable intelligence for the plan to work the terrorists have to be able to get the explosive filled laptop past security. If they can do get explosives past inside a laptop case why can't they do the same using clothes, books, shoes etc.?...and if they can do that unless you ban all electronics you still have a major security problem for which the only solution is background checks for all passengers.
Requiring laptops to be put in the hold also increases the danger of an unnoticed lithium battery fire which is why we are currently required to have laptops in carry-on baggage and not in checked luggage. So this new security measure is one which carries a increased safety risk so it's something they should only do if there really is a significant terrorist threat.
I disagree. USB-C is clearly going to replace USB-A over time. It works well and provides high speed and good power connectivity. However not many devices support it yet so if you want a machine that you can use today and still use in a few years time the best bet is a machine which supports both USB-A and C. Instead we have Apple producing machines which will be great in a few years time but bad now and MS providing ones which are great now but will be a pain in a few years time....which is why I bought a Dell with both USB-A and C so I can use it now and in a few years time.
If they were 'infinitely fast' it wouldn't matter; you could write everything in interpreted BASIC and it wouldn't matter.
Oh it's even worse than that. If you have an infinitely fast computer you never need to program it because a simple random number generator can immediately simulate the effect of an infinitely number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards in no time at all. Not only will this give you every possible program in every possible language in no time but searching for the right one will be easy too - infinite speed is really useful....and as a side effect you will also produce the works of Shakespeare as well as every other author living, dead or yet to be born as well as their translations into every language using whatever symbols you have on your simulated keyboard.
So even if you ignore whether or not an infinitely fast computer is possible the question itself is logically inconsistent because an infinitely fast computer would not need to be programmed let alone optimized as you pointed out.
Actually that is an appallingly bad definition from a dictionary for the "common usage" interpretation since it misses the important requirement that it be a huge change. Try a better dictionary like the Cambridge english dictionary if you want a more correct common usage definition - they even know how to spell colour correctly too!;-)
Not really. If it were for coders it would be discussing how to mask out irrelevant interrupts and install a suitable interrupt handler to deal with non-maskable interrupts.
I doubt the headline writer saw what they did there though. A quantum leap is literally the smallest possible change to a system. So the headline suggests they have made the smallest possible improvement which is not very impressive at all.
It allows calling of external functions located in libraries. I suppose technically it is the linker which actually links the call to the function (either statically or dynamically) but nevertheless the result is that you have well established libraries of C functions which you can call from C.
MS is trying to copy Apples walled garden approach
Since when has Apple ever offered a $49 (or free for students/educators) upgrade to remove the wall around the garden? For that price they will upgrade 10 S to 10 Pro without any restrictions.
Apparently not quite - it seems that it is a full version of Windows, unlike RT, just with a restriction to only run MS store apps. The article says it will be free for students and educators to upgrade it to Windows 10 Pro and $49 (I presume US) for everyone else. So there is not much motivation for someone to hack around the restriction since the vast majority of those it is aimed at can remove the restriction for free.
I suspect they are really aiming Windows 10S at an institute's machines which they want to be able to manage and control easily and not at personal devices where people want a lot more freedom.
C does not just support functions - it supports libraries too. Arguably it also supports objects as well since you can put function pointers in a struct but by that point most people would just use C++. The only thing C does not support is a module.
Slashdot Mirror
Certainly not in France!
...add when you add the 8% social tax to it that makes 53%.
Fuck the NSA, CIA, FBI, and everyone else that finds security issues and keeps them private. They are the problem, not Microsoft.
MS is correct in noting that both the TLAs and the users who failed to apply the patch share some of the blame. However, at least an equal share of the blame lies with MS for the appalling number of serious bugs that Windows has. While it is impossible to write bug-free code many security bugs in Linux and Macs typically require existing user-level access to the machine which makes them much less serious. Those that do allow remote access are rare enough that they are huge news, not part of a typical monthly patch cycle.
So as I see it the blame goes three ways: MS for a bad security model for Windows; the TLAs for hiding the flaw after they spotted it and users who don't apply updates regularly when they should know how bug-ridden Windows is.
Does Theresa May aspire to be elected to an office?
Yes, she does but only for Member of Parliament, NOT Prime Minister. The position of PM is not an elected one but an appointed one. The reigning monarch chooses the PM but by long-standing tradition always picks the leader of the party with a majority of seats in the commons. The PM remains in office until either they step down or they are fired by the monarch. They may also have to step down if they lose a confidence motion but I'm not sure whether that is legally binding or whether it just means that they have lost the ability to govern so they always do step down.
So she really is not a "candidate for PM" but just a leader of her party who is seeking re-election and, if her party gets enough seats, she will be appointed PM and command enough support in the commons to be able to hold the position.
You have some good points but all of these are things that are likely to become less important with time. Costs to implement decrease as market volume builds. Vendors get more expertise with the technology and are less likely to screw up. Cheaper implementations mean it is possible to add all the functionality to more/all ports etc.
Unless there is something which prevents the implementation costs reducing - usually this is some patent/proprietary thing like it was with Firewire - I'd be surprised if there is not a slow shift over to the new connector probably driven by the faster-charging speeds for mobile devices.
If your device isn't USB-C, you either buy a tiny adapter for about 2-3 pound...
If I wanted to carry around bags of dongles everywhere I go I would have stuck with a Mac. I don't mind the odd adapter for less frequent/likely usage cases but I want a laptop which has most of the common ports built in.
The labs aren't generally now zero weight
The labs were never zero weight nor have I heard of anywhere in any country where they are zero. We were talking about assignments i.e. questions students take home to practice the material not a lab where they are learning completely different skills on experimental techniques.
That the US is going to see significantly more brain drain in the years to come does not seem to me like a very controversial prediction.
That's very probably true but I very much doubt it will be to France where at least ~15 years ago you used to pay over 50% of your income in tax, academic salaries were far lower than the US and Canada and the VAT/sales tax is 20%. There are many non-financial advantages such as the food, country, culture, people etc. but while I loved all of that when I lived there I've noticed that Americans seem to care quite a bit more about the financial side and on the US scale the politics is probably somewhere left of what they would call communism (although it's actually not much to the left of much of Europe) so I doubt France will be a top choice of destination.
The problem is that students do not do homework anymore and almost never on time.
To get around that I use the Moodle online quiz system. It has a merciless timer and I make no exceptions to the deadline although I do drop the lowest mark for illnesses etc. as well as provide two "mock exam" assignments which act as practice for the midterm and final. The questions I wrote usually use randomized numbers so while they can copy the method from a friend they at least have to do the calculation themselves. I also give the assignments very little weight - I actually tried zero (which how it was in the UK when I was an undergrad) but nobody did the assignments so I have it pegged at 5% which is enough that students will do them but without penalizing their grade if they struggle to learn a particular topic and still ensuring that the exams carry all the real assessment weight.
If written material were provided in addition to the video that would be great
I always do that simply because it is not possible to communicate all the material in a video without making it so long that nobody would ever watch it! The other advantage of this is that after improving the written material a few times it got to the point where I no longer suggest a textbook which saves the students ~$200 each and is vastly more convenient for them since I make it available as an unencumbered PDF...which also had the added benefit that more of them read it so it was win-win-win!
Speaking as a physics professor who has tried many of these new techniques - I've done video lectures which are up on YouTube, in-class tutorials, clickers etc. - I get really annoyed by this type of hyperbolic promotions of them. Technology has indeed given us some better ways of doing things and in that the OP is right that we should explore and use them. However, somethings are best taught in the more traditional lecture format and frankly, when I was a student myself we were all supposed to read around the subject - not just limited to reading the textbook but other books too - as well as attend the lecture so this is hardly a "new idea".
In particular one of the things I have noticed with many of these new techniques is that they communicate far less information and those using them often have to take material out of a syllabus. They then compare this to the original lecture and it is no surprise that they find that students learn the material better. However if the original lecture format was repeated with the same reduced syllabus and far more time on each topic I expect that this too would get better results if for no other reason than students have less to revise for the exam.
So please let's not start the irresponsible hype that old lectures are dead just because we have an arsenal of new techniques. Some of these techniques may have disadvantages over the "old" lecture style particularly when it comes to the amount of material covered which, for a subject like physics, is extremely important because it has a more linear nature until you get to the final undergrad year. Plus some of the new techniques are grossly unfair since they award marks for a group and not individuals which means it can be heavily influenced by how lucky you are with your group members.
Is there actionable intelligence to back up this ban...
Even if there is actionable intelligence for the plan to work the terrorists have to be able to get the explosive filled laptop past security. If they can do get explosives past inside a laptop case why can't they do the same using clothes, books, shoes etc.? ...and if they can do that unless you ban all electronics you still have a major security problem for which the only solution is background checks for all passengers.
Requiring laptops to be put in the hold also increases the danger of an unnoticed lithium battery fire which is why we are currently required to have laptops in carry-on baggage and not in checked luggage. So this new security measure is one which carries a increased safety risk so it's something they should only do if there really is a significant terrorist threat.
Even if it blocked the entire internet I'd still manage to live. You do realize there was life before the internet right?
This time, yes.
I disagree. USB-C is clearly going to replace USB-A over time. It works well and provides high speed and good power connectivity. However not many devices support it yet so if you want a machine that you can use today and still use in a few years time the best bet is a machine which supports both USB-A and C. Instead we have Apple producing machines which will be great in a few years time but bad now and MS providing ones which are great now but will be a pain in a few years time....which is why I bought a Dell with both USB-A and C so I can use it now and in a few years time.
You forgot "Appeal to authority" - you can get AMERCA.
If they were 'infinitely fast' it wouldn't matter; you could write everything in interpreted BASIC and it wouldn't matter.
Oh it's even worse than that. If you have an infinitely fast computer you never need to program it because a simple random number generator can immediately simulate the effect of an infinitely number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards in no time at all. Not only will this give you every possible program in every possible language in no time but searching for the right one will be easy too - infinite speed is really useful....and as a side effect you will also produce the works of Shakespeare as well as every other author living, dead or yet to be born as well as their translations into every language using whatever symbols you have on your simulated keyboard.
So even if you ignore whether or not an infinitely fast computer is possible the question itself is logically inconsistent because an infinitely fast computer would not need to be programmed let alone optimized as you pointed out.
I've found it depends on the environment he's in.
Actually that is an appallingly bad definition from a dictionary for the "common usage" interpretation since it misses the important requirement that it be a huge change. Try a better dictionary like the Cambridge english dictionary if you want a more correct common usage definition - they even know how to spell colour correctly too! ;-)
You don't own your own computer if it's operating system spies on you and reports you to the authorities.
Just because you made some poor choices about what OS to use and/or how it is configured does not mean you no longer own your computer.
I understand this is for coders...
Not really. If it were for coders it would be discussing how to mask out irrelevant interrupts and install a suitable interrupt handler to deal with non-maskable interrupts.
I doubt the headline writer saw what they did there though. A quantum leap is literally the smallest possible change to a system. So the headline suggests they have made the smallest possible improvement which is not very impressive at all.
*How* does C support libraries?
It allows calling of external functions located in libraries. I suppose technically it is the linker which actually links the call to the function (either statically or dynamically) but nevertheless the result is that you have well established libraries of C functions which you can call from C.
MS is trying to copy Apples walled garden approach
Since when has Apple ever offered a $49 (or free for students/educators) upgrade to remove the wall around the garden? For that price they will upgrade 10 S to 10 Pro without any restrictions.
....just like Windows RT was?
Apparently not quite - it seems that it is a full version of Windows, unlike RT, just with a restriction to only run MS store apps. The article says it will be free for students and educators to upgrade it to Windows 10 Pro and $49 (I presume US) for everyone else. So there is not much motivation for someone to hack around the restriction since the vast majority of those it is aimed at can remove the restriction for free.
I suspect they are really aiming Windows 10S at an institute's machines which they want to be able to manage and control easily and not at personal devices where people want a lot more freedom.
C does not just support functions - it supports libraries too. Arguably it also supports objects as well since you can put function pointers in a struct but by that point most people would just use C++. The only thing C does not support is a module.