Once upon a time, there were the DC-8-61 and DC8-63 which were stretched several over 36 feet to a length that looked ridiculous. They put a hardpoint under the tail which could drag on the ground if the pilot overrotated, which was VERY common on that bird. (Also, sitting near the rear in turbulence was sphincter tightening as you could see the fuse was wobbling at least 6 feet sideways in random directions.)
I flew in one to France in 1973, and it dragged the tail *hard* on takeoff: There was no damage because of the hardpoint.
So if tailstrikes are a problem, quit screwing around and put a hardpoint there to protect the aircraft. If it worked on a DC-8 40 years ago, it can work on a piddly little 737 now, FFS.
Because business NEEDS to have the illusion that they "have a neck to choke" when something goes wrong, so they need to have a "contract" with a "company". I've heard this from the C-suite for years. (That is what Red Hat is selling, and why they're successful!)
It's nuts, really: Anyone who reads common software company contracts/EULAs knows that they have NO recourse if something goes wrong, but if they think they can somehow hang blame on a vendor if they have a problem, then that makes them feel safe.
In truth, the OSS model means that if something goes wrong and the vendor tells you to f**k off or goes bankrupt, you can find someone else to help you. If a closed-source vendor can't/won't help or goes under, you're screwed much harder.
"But fifty years' worth of attempts to turn software development into a legitimate engineering practice have failed."
Nobody has really tried to do this: There's more money to be made by keeping programmers as fungible low-level serfs and pumping out piles of "good enough" code, so all the pressure is against the creation of a proper professional practice.
Why are engineers professional? Because the failures in the past of unprofessional engineers killed a lot of people. (I'm thinking pre-Brunel, not recently.) So societal pressure pushed engineers to self regulate and/or be regulated, and that pressure forced a profession to emerge.
When a LOT of people start dying from bad software, then you'll see people wake up to the dangers: Hopefully you'll see a grassroots push to start to force liability on the producers of software and see some heads roll. That may lead to a push to regulate and control the standards that software needs to meet, and that may lead to some sort of professional software and ITSec organisation that will serve to raise the devs above serfdom and into a professional practice.
IMHO, Linus Torvalds is a heck of a lot closer to a "software professional" than anyone at Microsoft.
(If you take my tone as being critical of engineers, don't. I have the highest respect for engineers and I only wish that software developers and IT security people had the same level of professionalism!)
The problem with TV is that the amount of advertising is increasing to the point where watching in real time is too frustrating.
Of course people are turning to other sources where they can watch without the constant interruption of yet more and more and more commercials. The channels are starting to run certain ads more than once during a single ad break: Why would anyone want to watch that?
"- is it time for the government to roll out legislation that will enforce safety standards for car computers as well?"
Which would be covered under *any* sort of "product liability for software" legislation.
Seriously: You can't buy food without the producer going through FDA checks, you can't buy a car without all the right safety and functionality checked by a gummint agency, you can't trade stocks without oversight by the SEC, so why can software vendors continue to peddle insecure crap with no liability?
'...a suite of middleware that relies heavily on some of the internals of Windows. Changing out anything is a risk that the product doesn't work as expected. '
You need to FIX that. ITSec researchers are seeing more and more threats going forwards. Any product that locks an end user to a specific configuration with no updates allowed is a security nightmare waiting to happen.
Devs have to accept and adjust to a world where every library and tool (Java, Oracle, Adobe, M$, etc.) is going to be updated at short notice as part of the enterprise need to have secure systems and meet regulatory and contractual obligations. The days are OVER where lazy businesses and devs can assume they will be on the same IE 6 and Java JRE 3.1 forever and ever because security is Someone Else's Problem.
The enterprise is going to be interesting with this stuff. If MS sends PII from Windows 10 to Microsoft, and an enterprise in the USA or Europe "upgrades" to Windows 10, then how can that enterprise continue to claim "Safe Harbor" certification?
I suspect that Microsoft is going to have to rip out all the privacy-destroying stuff before it can sell to a company that needs to be "Safe Harbor" certified.
5.47 pounds is reasonable for a "business laptop". It is WAY overweight for an "ultrabook". The whole point of an ultrabook is that it's powerful *and* light. And way expensive, too. It's the supermodel of laptops.
5.47 pounds just makes it the Rosanne Barr of ultrabooks.
The problem there is that when the well is contaminated, it's WAY too late to do anything. Even if the responsible company immediately stops fracking completely, the well will continue to provide polluted water until the aquifer gets cleaned out somehow. That may be anytime from years to millenia.
I think it's more reasonable for the landowner to be able to force the fracking company to "fix what they broke" and to ensure the landowner has a supply of clean water equal to their current well production available to them for free until the well runs clean again. Or the frackers pay for all the land at pre-fracking market value.
So first they say " left turned on for 248 days, it will enter a failsafe mode" then they say "all the Generator Control Units will shut off, leaving the plane without power, and the control of the plane will be lost."
That is NOT fail "SAFE". That is fail "EVERYBODY DEAD".
Hmm, all banks with a common API so any flaw in that API means that the cybercriminals have instant access to all banking information for everyone everywhere. And we know d*mned well that there WILL be flaws in that API.
"Actually I fail to see how "motivate your employees to work harder" necessarily translates into "employees are happier""
Fair criticism. I just think that for people with common sense, more money likely (not necessarily!) translates into a better life and more satisfaction, up to a point.
A larger apartment closer to work for a more relaxing commute, fewer nagging worries about money, chances to enjoy nicer "things", etc. are all minor but real improvements in quality of life that can be enjoyed with a higher salary. Some people are very much motivated by money and some are less so, but unless your staff have genuine addiction problems, more money is likely something they will appreciate.
He surely owns a large chunk of the company: Why take a huge salary when you can motivate your employees to work harder and make the company worth more? That is a faster way to get rich than just paying yourself a salary.
He gets rich faster, and the employees are happier. It's win-win. Just don't pretend it's about "justice" and not simple self-interest.
No, the media should be asked to make a big stink about this, and the mind that can countenance that this is in any way a proper use of the system must be removed from any position of authority. A felony charge will follow that child around for the rest of his life. That is NOT acceptable.
First of all, welcome to Canada and I hope you're having a good time in our great nation. Sorry about the winters!
Second of all, if the USA wants to do the H1-B visa fairly for all USA citizens, here's a suggestion: Make the minimum annual salary for each H1-B visa holder 10 times "the poverty threshold for a single person under 65" (about 10 x $11,490US = $114,900US based on 2013 numbers.)
That way you will eliminate the problem of employers getting "cheap" labour to corrupt and undercut the job market to displace honest, capable USA citizen workers, and you'll still be able to attract the genuine foreign talent that these billionaires claim to need.
If these billionaires REALLY want what they claim they want, then they'll have no problem with this change. And pigs will fly, too!
Just put two reasonably competent people in the cockpit at all times and stop trying to f**k an extra penny out of every dime, you cheap chiselling b*st*rds.
Right now many feeder airlines are barely paying a living wage for their junior cockpit staff, so stop pretending that the personnel costs are going to put you out of business. You're certainly not passing along the recent fuel cost savings to us sardines.
(I haven't had my coffee yet, so that's my excuse for the "negative tone" in this post.)
Slashdot Mirror
Once upon a time, there were the DC-8-61 and DC8-63 which were stretched several over 36 feet to a length that looked ridiculous. They put a hardpoint under the tail which could drag on the ground if the pilot overrotated, which was VERY common on that bird. (Also, sitting near the rear in turbulence was sphincter tightening as you could see the fuse was wobbling at least 6 feet sideways in random directions.)
I flew in one to France in 1973, and it dragged the tail *hard* on takeoff: There was no damage because of the hardpoint.
So if tailstrikes are a problem, quit screwing around and put a hardpoint there to protect the aircraft. If it worked on a DC-8 40 years ago, it can work on a piddly little 737 now, FFS.
Because business NEEDS to have the illusion that they "have a neck to choke" when something goes wrong, so they need to have a "contract" with a "company". I've heard this from the C-suite for years. (That is what Red Hat is selling, and why they're successful!)
It's nuts, really: Anyone who reads common software company contracts/EULAs knows that they have NO recourse if something goes wrong, but if they think they can somehow hang blame on a vendor if they have a problem, then that makes them feel safe.
In truth, the OSS model means that if something goes wrong and the vendor tells you to f**k off or goes bankrupt, you can find someone else to help you. If a closed-source vendor can't/won't help or goes under, you're screwed much harder.
"But fifty years' worth of attempts to turn software development into a legitimate engineering practice have failed."
Nobody has really tried to do this: There's more money to be made by keeping programmers as fungible low-level serfs and pumping out piles of "good enough" code, so all the pressure is against the creation of a proper professional practice.
Why are engineers professional? Because the failures in the past of unprofessional engineers killed a lot of people. (I'm thinking pre-Brunel, not recently.) So societal pressure pushed engineers to self regulate and/or be regulated, and that pressure forced a profession to emerge.
When a LOT of people start dying from bad software, then you'll see people wake up to the dangers: Hopefully you'll see a grassroots push to start to force liability on the producers of software and see some heads roll. That may lead to a push to regulate and control the standards that software needs to meet, and that may lead to some sort of professional software and ITSec organisation that will serve to raise the devs above serfdom and into a professional practice.
IMHO, Linus Torvalds is a heck of a lot closer to a "software professional" than anyone at Microsoft.
(If you take my tone as being critical of engineers, don't. I have the highest respect for engineers and I only wish that software developers and IT security people had the same level of professionalism!)
The Canadians learned the lesson at Tarnak Farm: Get the hell out of ANY country that is suffering US airforce attacks.
The problem with TV is that the amount of advertising is increasing to the point where watching in real time is too frustrating.
Of course people are turning to other sources where they can watch without the constant interruption of yet more and more and more commercials. The channels are starting to run certain ads more than once during a single ad break: Why would anyone want to watch that?
Without a PVR, TV is simply unwatchable.
memo to self: ALWAYS swallow the coffee BEFORE reading Hognoxious' posts.
I'm going to need a new keyboard! :):):)
"- is it time for the government to roll out legislation that will enforce safety standards for car computers as well?"
Which would be covered under *any* sort of "product liability for software" legislation.
Seriously: You can't buy food without the producer going through FDA checks, you can't buy a car without all the right safety and functionality checked by a gummint agency, you can't trade stocks without oversight by the SEC, so why can software vendors continue to peddle insecure crap with no liability?
'...a suite of middleware that relies heavily on some of the internals of Windows. Changing out anything is a risk that the product doesn't work as expected. '
You need to FIX that. ITSec researchers are seeing more and more threats going forwards. Any product that locks an end user to a specific configuration with no updates allowed is a security nightmare waiting to happen.
Devs have to accept and adjust to a world where every library and tool (Java, Oracle, Adobe, M$, etc.) is going to be updated at short notice as part of the enterprise need to have secure systems and meet regulatory and contractual obligations. The days are OVER where lazy businesses and devs can assume they will be on the same IE 6 and Java JRE 3.1 forever and ever because security is Someone Else's Problem.
The enterprise is going to be interesting with this stuff. If MS sends PII from Windows 10 to Microsoft, and an enterprise in the USA or Europe "upgrades" to Windows 10, then how can that enterprise continue to claim "Safe Harbor" certification?
I suspect that Microsoft is going to have to rip out all the privacy-destroying stuff before it can sell to a company that needs to be "Safe Harbor" certified.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If PySolitaire actually *worked* on Windows 10, it would be nice. Too bad it doesn't. :(
5.47 pounds is reasonable for a "business laptop". It is WAY overweight for an "ultrabook". The whole point of an ultrabook is that it's powerful *and* light. And way expensive, too. It's the supermodel of laptops.
5.47 pounds just makes it the Rosanne Barr of ultrabooks.
If this is "news" shouldn't it be new? I saw Freeman Dyson give this talk in 1979.
The problem there is that when the well is contaminated, it's WAY too late to do anything. Even if the responsible company immediately stops fracking completely, the well will continue to provide polluted water until the aquifer gets cleaned out somehow. That may be anytime from years to millenia.
I think it's more reasonable for the landowner to be able to force the fracking company to "fix what they broke" and to ensure the landowner has a supply of clean water equal to their current well production available to them for free until the well runs clean again. Or the frackers pay for all the land at pre-fracking market value.
Yeah, I'm a dreamer.
So first they say " left turned on for 248 days, it will enter a failsafe mode" then they say "all the Generator Control Units will shut off, leaving the plane without power, and the control of the plane will be lost."
That is NOT fail "SAFE". That is fail "EVERYBODY DEAD".
Hmm, all banks with a common API so any flaw in that API means that the cybercriminals have instant access to all banking information for everyone everywhere. And we know d*mned well that there WILL be flaws in that API.
I prefer the bazaar to the cathedral, please.
ISPs lie. Who knew?
Seriously, if I had a nickel for every time my ISP (*cough* rogers.com *cough*) lied to me, I'd be a rich man.
I think they deliberately fill their storefronts with toxic twerps who score the highest on sociopathy tests.
"Actually I fail to see how "motivate your employees to work harder" necessarily translates into "employees are happier""
Fair criticism. I just think that for people with common sense, more money likely (not necessarily!) translates into a better life and more satisfaction, up to a point.
A larger apartment closer to work for a more relaxing commute, fewer nagging worries about money, chances to enjoy nicer "things", etc. are all minor but real improvements in quality of life that can be enjoyed with a higher salary. Some people are very much motivated by money and some are less so, but unless your staff have genuine addiction problems, more money is likely something they will appreciate.
He surely owns a large chunk of the company: Why take a huge salary when you can motivate your employees to work harder and make the company worth more? That is a faster way to get rich than just paying yourself a salary.
He gets rich faster, and the employees are happier. It's win-win. Just don't pretend it's about "justice" and not simple self-interest.
Meh.
No, the media should be asked to make a big stink about this, and the mind that can countenance that this is in any way a proper use of the system must be removed from any position of authority. A felony charge will follow that child around for the rest of his life. That is NOT acceptable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2...
Personally, I think Canada is the greatest place to live in the world, but I'm biased!
First of all, welcome to Canada and I hope you're having a good time in our great nation. Sorry about the winters!
Second of all, if the USA wants to do the H1-B visa fairly for all USA citizens, here's a suggestion: Make the minimum annual salary for each H1-B visa holder 10 times "the poverty threshold for a single person under 65" (about 10 x $11,490US = $114,900US based on 2013 numbers.)
That way you will eliminate the problem of employers getting "cheap" labour to corrupt and undercut the job market to displace honest, capable USA citizen workers, and you'll still be able to attract the genuine foreign talent that these billionaires claim to need.
If these billionaires REALLY want what they claim they want, then they'll have no problem with this change. And pigs will fly, too!
Resigning the CSR reuses the old keys. That's a security error: you're essentially reusing a password.
A new certificate should be generated using a new set of keys, and the old CSR should be discarded.
Just put two reasonably competent people in the cockpit at all times and stop trying to f**k an extra penny out of every dime, you cheap chiselling b*st*rds.
Right now many feeder airlines are barely paying a living wage for their junior cockpit staff, so stop pretending that the personnel costs are going to put you out of business. You're certainly not passing along the recent fuel cost savings to us sardines.
(I haven't had my coffee yet, so that's my excuse for the "negative tone" in this post.)
So it looks like I can just drop one of these into my xubuntu 14.04 LTS desktop. Kewl!
Now if I can just convince SWMBO that I NEED one...
What kernel version is needed to support these drives?