Mark probably did Apple a favor if only a very tiny one.
1) No such thing as bad publicity. In this case its not even bad. People HATE facebook, they don't trust facebook. There are people who have feelings like that about Apple too of course but they don't count they were never going to buy an iWhatever anyway. Mark probably will drive some anti-fb folks into the arms of Apple.
2) I have seen this stuff play out in the corporate world. His staff will have to go buy new Android phones; but its not like Apple loses anything on the phones they have already sold those users; or any of their cut on the apps those users already bought. Meanwhile Mark's anger will at some point find a new target. At which point most of those people will go back to their preferred device. They may even end up buying a new one having given their old one away to friends or family (there by bringing some new people into the apple fold) and increasing Apples sales even more.
First you setup a TCP connection. Gotta have some kind of transport. That takes care of all the reliability and a lot of the recovery you need.
Next you start setting up the TLS connection on top of that plain text TCP channel. Okay - part of that is plain text you need to negotiate a cipher suite; do authentication, perhaps mutual authentication. You need to exchange symmetric keys etc.
All things you'd still need to do even if you crammed everything into one big fat protocol.
The only advantage I see in quic at all is sessions being separate from network addresses so they can survive address changes. That is kind of cool; I men your mobile could do from wifi to cellular without breaking a single transfer. There are other solutions to that like byte range requests though; that we have today. Improving support and reliability of those features might be easier frankly than upending the protocol stack
Why does it have to ride UDP? Certainly most middle boxes will forward 'protocol unknown' over IP at least if instructed to do so. Seems like at least 4 bytes worth of source and destination port in the UDP header that is basically no needed; given quick has connection ids.
I mean if we are going to both implementing a new transport layer; its going to be painful even if you do ride UDP. If we are doing this in the name of efficiency; we should at least do it right and not just burn 4 bytes per-packet b/c not doing tcp/udp is hard.
Russia can't reasonably resist us militarily in virtually any theater.
Russia's economy is nearly irrelevant to our own. It could collapse to today and Wall street would hardly bat an eye.
Russia does not have the productive capacity to dump in other markets; other than perhaps in unskilled labor products and maybe for a short while oil/gas. In this sense they are as grave a threat to us as say most of the middle east.
---- Meanwhile China, at least if they are willing to cut the nose off to spite the face - absolutely can make us miserable today.
Another thing I'd like to point out about merchant fees.
Handling cash is not 'free' from a retailers preservative either. There is much more possibility for shrink even if it does not involve fraud or theft. Bills stick together etc. If you don't close business out in time to get deposits to the banks; you can lose a days interest on those deposits. That matters for large operations. You have pay security people to safely transport cash to the depositing institution; fuel, salary, vehicle maintenance.
Some business are deciding not to accept cash; and there is a reason for that - if they can avoid those associated costs suddenly the CC merchant fees don't look so bad.
Having some cash with you can also save your life if robbed, a thief will just run away happy with your cash
Maybe - I'd love to see some statistics on that. Personally I never carry much cash, and I do carry a pistol. If you try to rob me one or both of us is going to the hospital or the morgue. I am alright with the status quo there.
It is safe (no risk of card skimming)
For select definitions of safe. If the attack vector is simple fraud; say the deliberately sell you broken or defective item and then just disappear you have no recourse. But alright I will grant you this one at least for the case of places with physical buildings, names they want to continue using and printed receipts (although if you lose that and you paid cash; gawd help you).
you are noot feeding the bank (2% transaction fee)
True but those merchant fees are priced in; retailers would not accept cards unless they had determined by doing so they move product thanks to the ease of transactions and ultimately make more $$$. So when you pay cash you are just padding the big retailer's pockets. I mean maybe you like them better than the banks and that's your call but there is no gain in that for you. In fact its a loss for you. Unless you have terrible credit and have some card oriented to bad risk people, you almost certainly qualify for "rewards" of some kind even on a no-annual fee card. After all the exclusions and games that can still work out to 1.5% of your purchases back in cash or gift cards etc. Those come out of the merchant fees the banks charge. So when you use cash at retailer you are basically giving %1 or so to all the people who were smarter than you; used a card, read and understood the rewards programs offered to them.
it is private (big brother does not knowwhat you buy)
An argument from twenty years ago.. Now odds are pretty good there are cameras in the parking and your license plate was OCR'ed. If not that than the face recognition has you in the shop. If big brother wants that data they will get it; subpoenas are thing. If you are concerned about buying things from the inside of some dudes coat on the corner you might have something.
Think, big brother loves the plastic card for a reason....
doubtlessly it certainly makes things easier. I think all that talk of a cashless society for a while was driven by that. I don't hear of that (as often); given the other revelations about the NSA, Target corp, etc my conclusion is the PTBs have solved the problem of de-anonymizing cash to the degree they felt it was a problem.
The reality of 2018 is that most of the concerns about using CCs for pretty much your whole life are concers you will have with cash to, or simply don't make sense for other reasons given how the world has changed.
WAAAAYYY - less secure. You have moved secret handling (the PIN) from a special purpose devices with limited network interaction, that runs software that is not easily modified or updated by unauthorized parties; and moved it to a general purpose device.
A device that is on network all the time, a device where users are likely to add all kinds of software. A device where published security issues in the platform might not get patched at all... The potential for an attacker to either obtain the secrets for use elsewhere or step into the authorization process is much greater
I mean lets be honest here; nobody is going to do jack about it. We don't ever do anything about China's bad behavior except 'talk' and maybe sell some weapons systems to Taiwan.
China unlike Russia is real threat to us and all anyone in our government; with the occasional (and only occasional) exception being Trump cares to do anything about it.
The talking heads will cry about how important free trade is while we literally let all our industrial and defense secrets walk out the door.
Why don't we drop all the crap about protecting this and that. We are big enough, diverse enough, dynamic enough economy there is no need for such protection. If you boss wants to fire you because you are gay, black, Christian, Muslim, White, whatever - find somewhere better to work!
The Republican party IS Trump's party. He is the president, he won get over it. Actually look at the midterms yesterday - the GOP members that continue to resist Trump's policy and approach are the ones who lost! Cruz goes along because he knows his damn place; and look it got him re-elected against a popular democrat in a state increasingly being over run with migrants; where we have DACA recipients casting illegal votes.
The old GOP was stupid and served nobody but the uber rich. The DNC serves nobody but their own and uses little loud mouthed inter-sectional minorities as useful idiots.
Actually if you think about the environmental and economic issues for 5min; ONLY Trump's ideas promise a long term bright future for America. Everything else is just hopium.
My guess would be that it work like marking an FB post private does. You can do it; but it will still display to somoene they have already displayed it to
There is exactly no reason though to do that at the messaging layer. (well there is one reason and I'll get to that) If you want that behavior the place to implement it is the client. After all if you want to 'rethink and recall' a message the best value there is for it to have never left your control. You most likely don't just not want the recipient seeing it but ideally you don't want anyone seeing it. After all if it goes to some server somewhere it could be the subject of discovery etc. Example maybe you write that poison pen letter to a colleague and decide that perhaps it was a little over the top and might be considered harassment. You cancel the message. if its sitting on the server somewhere and you do something else in the future; I can't see why it might not show up in discovery. In which case it could be used against you. No its better for you if that message stays on your equipment until its transmitted or destroyed.
So why do it server side? - Only legitimate reason I can think of is because everything has to be a s***y web application today, where the client state gets mostly blown away unless you keep the browser open. Yes there is HTML5 storage but literally nothing uses it.
This so stupid. Don't even pretend the Democrats have some kind of advantage in virtue here.
Trump's lies - some tall tales about turnout out events
Meanwhile we just watched Dianne Feinstein tell the whopper that nobody from her office leaked Christine Fords identity. Which is crazy because how else could it have become public? Now the truth might be she does not know who, but she said it was not her or her people. - Almost certainly a lie. Next we spent three weeks watching a good man get dragged thru the muck while the lefts political leaders did their damnedest to conceal all the statements Ford made to them that conflicted with her story du jour.
Oh how about when right before the 2012 election when Obama's people (Hillary included) try to sell us all on the idea that Bengazi was the response to a youtube video....
Or "If you like your plan you can keep it" - when all the research into the expected effects of the ACA indicated otherwise and Obama knew that!
Please - People who are upset with the "lies" Trump tells better damn well be libertarians, greens, etc, otherwise they just hypocritical partisan hacks.
They are not for the best. Basically these types of things just turn the electorate into a mob. We are not picking the next American idle here; this is serious. I think every citizen should be able to vote but those who don't want to take it seriously should do everyone a favor and butt out.
Voting is a right; however if you choose to exercise it you have responsibility to take it seriously. Frankly if election day rolls around you still need to be told, that it is election day, where to vote, and what the names of the candidates are - you have not done so. You have no business going to polls at this point IMHO.
With great responsibility comes great authority. They are treated that way because they are ultimately accountable for outcomes. You can't expect them to "let go" unless you also are going to excuse them when things go badly.
Kinda like Ship captains. At least while at sea they are still "the law" for the most part. Why because they are on the hook for the safety of every soul aboard, and the assets.
They shouldn't have made a mass transition to the new system, but rather should have piloted it with a small group of the best in class as the first users, who would then be in a position to help their colleagues thereby greatly minimizing the need to involve IT.
That might be about the most tone deaf stupid, IT think I have seen in a long time. Look have you any idea how a hospital operates? Its not like a GPs office. Nurses change in shifts. Different specialists see patients; You might have one attending physician overseeing the entire thing but the anesthesiologist, dietitian, physical therapist, gastrointerologist all need to see the same patient and they are never scheduled in a room together. Their entire communication is via charts. Oh and even the kitchen gets sent food prep instructions - per patient via the 'system'
You simply can't pilot something with X users, at hospital scale. Won't work. The best you can do is ask X people to do double entry for a little while to see if they hit any issues but the rest of the practice at large is going to still be using the old system.
Your choices are either hot cut - or - full scale integration between the new system and the one you are retiring; and all the bi-direction data translation and real-time synchronization issues there in.
A undergrad program should not be a tech school. This is problem with CS education in general. Very few schools are teaching CS - they are teaching programing. Programing is a moving target that changes all the time. It should be the focus. Ditto for lots of security topics; the focus should be on the principles and the why, less on the how.
Since the OP talked about biometrics what should someone with an undergrad degree know about them - When to use biometrics? When not to use biometrics? speak to ethical considerations around them - understand type 1 vs type 2 errors - have a good mental list of the type of bio-markers that can be used for identifiers -
None of the changes in the last 50 years. The designs of various sensors has, the reliability of devices has, etc, but all that is stuff I'd expect anyone implementing any solution would research before making decisions. The whole point of an undergrad degree in any given field is that is should show 1) you have the ability to execute complex requests, meet deadlines. solve problems, and cope with other arbitrary requirements and 2) that you possess a general understanding of the subject matter such that you have framework for quickly placing new information in context and you know what questions to ask and how to ask them when researching any specifics for whatever application you are working on.
University education should not be about leaving, with specific knowledge of C# or whatever the language du jour is. Let alone some biometrics package.
I was going to say one process results in a high strength, light weight, corrosion resistant material with malability and ductility characteristics that make it useful in a wide variety of applications from food preservation, to aerospace. They results in some binary gibberish that is only useful as a fiat currency - while offering some unique properties its very unclear they are 1) advantageous or 2) justify the cost over other solutions.
I think so actually. Nadella I think has been dead wrong on his management of the Windows properties. Opening it up has if anything slowed Windows development down in all the places that are important.
Market share-wise its still king but that could change pretty fast in a progressively more web / network driven experience on the desktop, and the ability to move.NET / MSSQL server over to Linux pretty painless on the server end.
Mind share-wise do you know anyone who is talking about Windows technologies as part of the long term road map; I sure as heck dont. When you IBM suggesting the TCO of managing a bunch of OSX machines is lower than windows desktops... Windows infrastructure in the enterprise is being increasingly seen as 'legacy' and burden to manage. In the cloud space is all "me too me too" "hey you can run docker containers and borne shell scripts on Windows" - "hey who gives a crap why would want to do that?; license fees and 10x the disk foot print are not features."
As far as transitioning to a cloud provider; clap clap clap for Nadella - he took the leading software provider and turned it into the also-ran cloud provider... Microsoft's numbers still look pretty good but the last 3M in the market have not been "great" for them especially compared the broader market. I am struggling to see how MS's current strategy does not ultimately turn it into IBM - a lumbering tech dinosaur that survives on the back of CTO's who have not updated their opinions since the major computing publications stopped issuing printed magazines. Unless there is vision I am not seeing reading the tech press and the investor press - its not a bright future.
The problem is parents don't want to arrange for child care before AND after school. So school has to start early so kids can be sent there before the work day begins. Therefore you can't make school later. By the way a lot of city dwellers dismiss the whole bus stop danger thing but out in country its a very problem. Several children in my area have been injured this year already by vehicles while waiting out the bus stop.
The problem is in unlit places drivers tend to hug the outside white line on the roads because that is the one they can see. Anyone standing to near the edge can get hit; if they are not wearing reflective or at least light colored clothing. Especially if they have head lights in the face from on coming traffic in the other direction. A little more day light really does have a safety impact!
So DST really does work. Its also much much easier for people to wake up with the sun. Past studies have shown getting up before dawn has negative cardiac impacts. I think rather than getting rid of DST we should do it more. Lets do it twice. Lets fallback once at the start of October and again in December. Lets spring forward twice as well once in march and again in may. That will actually give everyone light in the morning.
The only possible goal for this action is to literally starve the people outside our nation. You are a monster.
False - the objective there is to bar certain people from attempting profit off the rest of the worlds hunger over producing food and over working agriculture resources in the is country. 2nd to prevent the import of contaminated food stuffs that often bring with them invasive specie.
Let the rest of the worlds population 'naturally' adjust to the local carrying capacity of those places.
That's a cute little euphemism for "let them die".
Yes and no. Some near term death will be the predictable outcome. Its not worse than the territorial warfare and anti-terror BS that goes on now. How has interventionist policy worked out in Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc... These people ARE going to suffer and die in any case; we can harm the plant to or not; that really is the choice.
Yes because of the enormous cognitive dissonance of members of our two political parties. You have the mainstream political right in this country that wants to build pipelines thru the few large unspoiled sections of forests that remain east of the Mississippi; and anywhere else. Not to mention develop, develop, develop.
And you have the political left; which wants to keep growing our population which would be nearly stable if it was not for immigration by opening the door to literally everyone!
If you care and know anything at all about conservation you know the problem is always the number of people. Every other policy choice is a rounding error. If you look at American demographics you know there is once source of population growth - immigrants. Anyone who wants their grand kids to enjoy a country that looks like the one they were raised in; that has forests and wild life should be in favor of closing the f'ing boarders.
Until the left comes to their senses and stops its embrace of the most environmentally destructive thing they can do to the nation I live in; I have little patients for listing to why I pay double for everything because of carbon or give up beef.
Nationalism and Populism are the paths forward if you want to save America and not end up living in fifthly hell hole. Anyone who says different is misinformed or a liar.
Even if you could build some sort of fuel tanker craft to go a fuel up the telescope, that was cheaper than a new scope and lest costly to launch you still have to consider the risks..
You are talking about doing something by remote control our automation over vast distances; with limited ability to make any corrective actions once the match is struck so to speak. It requires an extremely high degree of precision as well. The slightest anomaly or error and you miss by mile trying to do something where millimeters count.
Our Areo-space engineers have done a lot of amazing things - frankly things that many thought would never be possibly. They are super smart folks who deserve a great deal of respect. Still something like this would have a pretty good probability of failure. Much more so because it was not planned at the outset and has not been done before so they have no experience with it. You have to add the chance of failure times the cost of the effort at least. Really its worse than that because we are talking about a single event not a case of of we are going to do this 1000 times and odds are 1% of the time it won't work so we more or less can expect to have to scrap 10 units..
Slashdot Mirror
Mark probably did Apple a favor if only a very tiny one.
1) No such thing as bad publicity. In this case its not even bad. People HATE facebook, they don't trust facebook. There are people who have feelings like that about Apple too of course but they don't count they were never going to buy an iWhatever anyway. Mark probably will drive some anti-fb folks into the arms of Apple.
2) I have seen this stuff play out in the corporate world. His staff will have to go buy new Android phones; but its not like Apple loses anything on the phones they have already sold those users; or any of their cut on the apps those users already bought. Meanwhile Mark's anger will at some point find a new target. At which point most of those people will go back to their preferred device. They may even end up buying a new one having given their old one away to friends or family (there by bringing some new people into the apple fold) and increasing Apples sales even more.
Zuck is being short sighted and stupid here.
Lets look a little deeper though.
First you setup a TCP connection. Gotta have some kind of transport. That takes care of all the reliability and a lot of the recovery you need.
Next you start setting up the TLS connection on top of that plain text TCP channel. Okay - part of that is plain text you need to negotiate a cipher suite; do authentication, perhaps mutual authentication. You need to exchange symmetric keys etc.
All things you'd still need to do even if you crammed everything into one big fat protocol.
The only advantage I see in quic at all is sessions being separate from network addresses so they can survive address changes. That is kind of cool; I men your mobile could do from wifi to cellular without breaking a single transfer. There are other solutions to that like byte range requests though; that we have today. Improving support and reliability of those features might be easier frankly than upending the protocol stack
Why does it have to ride UDP? Certainly most middle boxes will forward 'protocol unknown' over IP at least if instructed to do so. Seems like at least 4 bytes worth of source and destination port in the UDP header that is basically no needed; given quick has connection ids.
I mean if we are going to both implementing a new transport layer; its going to be painful even if you do ride UDP. If we are doing this in the name of efficiency; we should at least do it right and not just burn 4 bytes per-packet b/c not doing tcp/udp is hard.
Well lets see
Russia can't reasonably resist us militarily in virtually any theater.
Russia's economy is nearly irrelevant to our own. It could collapse to today and Wall street would hardly bat an eye.
Russia does not have the productive capacity to dump in other markets; other than perhaps in unskilled labor products and maybe for a short while oil/gas. In this sense they are as grave a threat to us as say most of the middle east.
----
Meanwhile China, at least if they are willing to cut the nose off to spite the face - absolutely can make us miserable today.
Another thing I'd like to point out about merchant fees.
Handling cash is not 'free' from a retailers preservative either. There is much more possibility for shrink even if it does not involve fraud or theft. Bills stick together etc. If you don't close business out in time to get deposits to the banks; you can lose a days interest on those deposits. That matters for large operations. You have pay security people to safely transport cash to the depositing institution; fuel, salary, vehicle maintenance.
Some business are deciding not to accept cash; and there is a reason for that - if they can avoid those associated costs suddenly the CC merchant fees don't look so bad.
Having some cash with you can also save your life if robbed, a thief will just run away happy with your cash
Maybe - I'd love to see some statistics on that. Personally I never carry much cash, and I do carry a pistol. If you try to rob me one or both of us is going to the hospital or the morgue. I am alright with the status quo there.
It is safe (no risk of card skimming)
For select definitions of safe. If the attack vector is simple fraud; say the deliberately sell you broken or defective item and then just disappear you have no recourse. But alright I will grant you this one at least for the case of places with physical buildings, names they want to continue using and printed receipts (although if you lose that and you paid cash; gawd help you).
you are noot feeding the bank (2% transaction fee)
True but those merchant fees are priced in; retailers would not accept cards unless they had determined by doing so they move product thanks to the ease of transactions and ultimately make more $$$. So when you pay cash you are just padding the big retailer's pockets. I mean maybe you like them better than the banks and that's your call but there is no gain in that for you. In fact its a loss for you. Unless you have terrible credit and have some card oriented to bad risk people, you almost certainly qualify for "rewards" of some kind even on a no-annual fee card. After all the exclusions and games that can still work out to 1.5% of your purchases back in cash or gift cards etc. Those come out of the merchant fees the banks charge. So when you use cash at retailer you are basically giving %1 or so to all the people who were smarter than you; used a card, read and understood the rewards programs offered to them.
it is private (big brother does not knowwhat you buy)
An argument from twenty years ago.. Now odds are pretty good there are cameras in the parking and your license plate was OCR'ed. If not that than the face recognition has you in the shop. If big brother wants that data they will get it; subpoenas are thing. If you are concerned about buying things from the inside of some dudes coat on the corner you might have something.
Think, big brother loves the plastic card for a reason....
doubtlessly it certainly makes things easier. I think all that talk of a cashless society for a while was driven by that. I don't hear of that (as often); given the other revelations about the NSA, Target corp, etc my conclusion is the PTBs have solved the problem of de-anonymizing cash to the degree they felt it was a problem.
The reality of 2018 is that most of the concerns about using CCs for pretty much your whole life are concers you will have with cash to, or simply don't make sense for other reasons given how the world has changed.
WAAAAYYY - less secure. You have moved secret handling (the PIN) from a special purpose devices with limited network interaction, that runs software that is not easily modified or updated by unauthorized parties; and moved it to a general purpose device.
A device that is on network all the time, a device where users are likely to add all kinds of software. A device where published security issues in the platform might not get patched at all... The potential for an attacker to either obtain the secrets for use elsewhere or step into the authorization process is much greater
I mean lets be honest here; nobody is going to do jack about it. We don't ever do anything about China's bad behavior except 'talk' and maybe sell some weapons systems to Taiwan.
China unlike Russia is real threat to us and all anyone in our government; with the occasional (and only occasional) exception being Trump cares to do anything about it.
The talking heads will cry about how important free trade is while we literally let all our industrial and defense secrets walk out the door.
Trump 2020!
Umm how about No!
Why don't we drop all the crap about protecting this and that. We are big enough, diverse enough, dynamic enough economy there is no need for such protection. If you boss wants to fire you because you are gay, black, Christian, Muslim, White, whatever - find somewhere better to work!
The Republican party IS Trump's party. He is the president, he won get over it. Actually look at the midterms yesterday - the GOP members that continue to resist Trump's policy and approach are the ones who lost! Cruz goes along because he knows his damn place; and look it got him re-elected against a popular democrat in a state increasingly being over run with migrants; where we have DACA recipients casting illegal votes.
The old GOP was stupid and served nobody but the uber rich. The DNC serves nobody but their own and uses little loud mouthed inter-sectional minorities as useful idiots.
Actually if you think about the environmental and economic issues for 5min; ONLY Trump's ideas promise a long term bright future for America. Everything else is just hopium.
My guess would be that it work like marking an FB post private does. You can do it; but it will still display to somoene they have already displayed it to
There is exactly no reason though to do that at the messaging layer. (well there is one reason and I'll get to that) If you want that behavior the place to implement it is the client. After all if you want to 'rethink and recall' a message the best value there is for it to have never left your control. You most likely don't just not want the recipient seeing it but ideally you don't want anyone seeing it. After all if it goes to some server somewhere it could be the subject of discovery etc. Example maybe you write that poison pen letter to a colleague and decide that perhaps it was a little over the top and might be considered harassment. You cancel the message. if its sitting on the server somewhere and you do something else in the future; I can't see why it might not show up in discovery. In which case it could be used against you. No its better for you if that message stays on your equipment until its transmitted or destroyed.
So why do it server side? - Only legitimate reason I can think of is because everything has to be a s***y web application today, where the client state gets mostly blown away unless you keep the browser open. Yes there is HTML5 storage but literally nothing uses it.
This so stupid. Don't even pretend the Democrats have some kind of advantage in virtue here.
Trump's lies - some tall tales about turnout out events
Meanwhile we just watched Dianne Feinstein tell the whopper that nobody from her office leaked Christine Fords identity. Which is crazy because how else could it have become public? Now the truth might be she does not know who, but she said it was not her or her people. - Almost certainly a lie. Next we spent three weeks watching a good man get dragged thru the muck while the lefts political leaders did their damnedest to conceal all the statements Ford made to them that conflicted with her story du jour.
Oh how about when right before the 2012 election when Obama's people (Hillary included) try to sell us all on the idea that Bengazi was the response to a youtube video....
Or "If you like your plan you can keep it" - when all the research into the expected effects of the ACA indicated otherwise and Obama knew that!
Please - People who are upset with the "lies" Trump tells better damn well be libertarians, greens, etc, otherwise they just hypocritical partisan hacks.
They are not for the best. Basically these types of things just turn the electorate into a mob. We are not picking the next American idle here; this is serious. I think every citizen should be able to vote but those who don't want to take it seriously should do everyone a favor and butt out.
Voting is a right; however if you choose to exercise it you have responsibility to take it seriously. Frankly if election day rolls around you still need to be told, that it is election day, where to vote, and what the names of the candidates are - you have not done so. You have no business going to polls at this point IMHO.
With great responsibility comes great authority. They are treated that way because they are ultimately accountable for outcomes. You can't expect them to "let go" unless you also are going to excuse them when things go badly.
Kinda like Ship captains. At least while at sea they are still "the law" for the most part. Why because they are on the hook for the safety of every soul aboard, and the assets.
They shouldn't have made a mass transition to the new system, but rather should have piloted it with a small group of the best in class as the first users, who would then be in a position to help their colleagues thereby greatly minimizing the need to involve IT.
That might be about the most tone deaf stupid, IT think I have seen in a long time. Look have you any idea how a hospital operates? Its not like a GPs office. Nurses change in shifts. Different specialists see patients; You might have one attending physician overseeing the entire thing but the anesthesiologist, dietitian, physical therapist, gastrointerologist all need to see the same patient and they are never scheduled in a room together. Their entire communication is via charts. Oh and even the kitchen gets sent food prep instructions - per patient via the 'system'
You simply can't pilot something with X users, at hospital scale. Won't work. The best you can do is ask X people to do double entry for a little while to see if they hit any issues but the rest of the practice at large is going to still be using the old system.
Your choices are either hot cut - or - full scale integration between the new system and the one you are retiring; and all the bi-direction data translation and real-time synchronization issues there in.
A undergrad program should not be a tech school. This is problem with CS education in general. Very few schools are teaching CS - they are teaching programing. Programing is a moving target that changes all the time. It should be the focus. Ditto for lots of security topics; the focus should be on the principles and the why, less on the how.
Since the OP talked about biometrics what should someone with an undergrad degree know about them -
When to use biometrics?
When not to use biometrics?
speak to ethical considerations around them -
understand type 1 vs type 2 errors -
have a good mental list of the type of bio-markers that can be used for identifiers -
None of the changes in the last 50 years. The designs of various sensors has, the reliability of devices has, etc, but all that is stuff I'd expect anyone implementing any solution would research before making decisions. The whole point of an undergrad degree in any given field is that is should show 1) you have the ability to execute complex requests, meet deadlines. solve problems, and cope with other arbitrary requirements and 2) that you possess a general understanding of the subject matter such that you have framework for quickly placing new information in context and you know what questions to ask and how to ask them when researching any specifics for whatever application you are working on.
University education should not be about leaving, with specific knowledge of C# or whatever the language du jour is. Let alone some biometrics package.
I was going to say one process results in a high strength, light weight, corrosion resistant material with malability and ductility characteristics that make it useful in a wide variety of applications from food preservation, to aerospace. They results in some binary gibberish that is only useful as a fiat currency - while offering some unique properties its very unclear they are 1) advantageous or 2) justify the cost over other solutions.
I think so actually. Nadella I think has been dead wrong on his management of the Windows properties. Opening it up has if anything slowed Windows development down in all the places that are important.
Market share-wise its still king but that could change pretty fast in a progressively more web / network driven experience on the desktop, and the ability to move .NET / MSSQL server over to Linux pretty painless on the server end.
Mind share-wise do you know anyone who is talking about Windows technologies as part of the long term road map; I sure as heck dont. When you IBM suggesting the TCO of managing a bunch of OSX machines is lower than windows desktops... Windows infrastructure in the enterprise is being increasingly seen as 'legacy' and burden to manage. In the cloud space is all "me too me too" "hey you can run docker containers and borne shell scripts on Windows" - "hey who gives a crap why would want to do that?; license fees and 10x the disk foot print are not features."
As far as transitioning to a cloud provider; clap clap clap for Nadella - he took the leading software provider and turned it into the also-ran cloud provider... Microsoft's numbers still look pretty good but the last 3M in the market have not been "great" for them especially compared the broader market. I am struggling to see how MS's current strategy does not ultimately turn it into IBM - a lumbering tech dinosaur that survives on the back of CTO's who have not updated their opinions since the major computing publications stopped issuing printed magazines. Unless there is vision I am not seeing reading the tech press and the investor press - its not a bright future.
Wouldn't it be easier to make a nice gtk front end for strace or something?
The problem is parents don't want to arrange for child care before AND after school. So school has to start early so kids can be sent there before the work day begins. Therefore you can't make school later. By the way a lot of city dwellers dismiss the whole bus stop danger thing but out in country its a very problem. Several children in my area have been injured this year already by vehicles while waiting out the bus stop.
The problem is in unlit places drivers tend to hug the outside white line on the roads because that is the one they can see. Anyone standing to near the edge can get hit; if they are not wearing reflective or at least light colored clothing. Especially if they have head lights in the face from on coming traffic in the other direction. A little more day light really does have a safety impact!
So DST really does work. Its also much much easier for people to wake up with the sun. Past studies have shown getting up before dawn has negative cardiac impacts. I think rather than getting rid of DST we should do it more. Lets do it twice. Lets fallback once at the start of October and again in December. Lets spring forward twice as well once in march and again in may. That will actually give everyone light in the morning.
Limit agricultural exports and imports.
The only possible goal for this action is to literally starve the people outside our nation. You are a monster.
False - the objective there is to bar certain people from attempting profit off the rest of the worlds hunger over producing food and over working agriculture resources in the is country. 2nd to prevent the import of contaminated food stuffs that often bring with them invasive specie.
Let the rest of the worlds population 'naturally' adjust to the local carrying capacity of those places.
That's a cute little euphemism for "let them die".
Yes and no. Some near term death will be the predictable outcome. Its not worse than the territorial warfare and anti-terror BS that goes on now. How has interventionist policy worked out in Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc... These people ARE going to suffer and die in any case; we can harm the plant to or not; that really is the choice.
personally - I'd like them to offer a phone that is maybe a few mills thicker but has swap-able batteries. That's just me though apparently.
Yes because of the enormous cognitive dissonance of members of our two political parties. You have the mainstream political right in this country that wants to build pipelines thru the few large unspoiled sections of forests that remain east of the Mississippi; and anywhere else. Not to mention develop, develop, develop.
And you have the political left; which wants to keep growing our population which would be nearly stable if it was not for immigration by opening the door to literally everyone!
If you care and know anything at all about conservation you know the problem is always the number of people. Every other policy choice is a rounding error. If you look at American demographics you know there is once source of population growth - immigrants. Anyone who wants their grand kids to enjoy a country that looks like the one they were raised in; that has forests and wild life should be in favor of closing the f'ing boarders.
Until the left comes to their senses and stops its embrace of the most environmentally destructive thing they can do to the nation I live in; I have little patients for listing to why I pay double for everything because of carbon or give up beef.
Nationalism and Populism are the paths forward if you want to save America and not end up living in fifthly hell hole. Anyone who says different is misinformed or a liar.
Even if you could build some sort of fuel tanker craft to go a fuel up the telescope, that was cheaper than a new scope and lest costly to launch you still have to consider the risks..
You are talking about doing something by remote control our automation over vast distances; with limited ability to make any corrective actions once the match is struck so to speak. It requires an extremely high degree of precision as well. The slightest anomaly or error and you miss by mile trying to do something where millimeters count.
Our Areo-space engineers have done a lot of amazing things - frankly things that many thought would never be possibly. They are super smart folks who deserve a great deal of respect. Still something like this would have a pretty good probability of failure. Much more so because it was not planned at the outset and has not been done before so they have no experience with it. You have to add the chance of failure times the cost of the effort at least. Really its worse than that because we are talking about a single event not a case of of we are going to do this 1000 times and odds are 1% of the time it won't work so we more or less can expect to have to scrap 10 units..