When I started the lead programmer had a degree in Nuclear Physics and insisted on coding his own text editor and assembler from scratch-- the assembler using his own mnemonics. Consequently, it was incompatible with any commercial product we might consider moving to later. The guy never dealt with ANY other code written by anyone. He also didn't have any error handling, which as a user, HE didn't need. My first project was to add error handling so someone could use the stuff besides him. He never used that error checking version tho. There are still apps out there running today written in the higher level language the guy designed at the time. It could run business apps in as little as 4K RAM per user. When we finally hosted it on Unix it scaled up really well...
Of course they want Net Neutrality. Without it, the NSA would have to impose an override, something they'd just as soon not have to do because word would get out and it would be unpopular. I mean, throttling NSA packets just wouldn't do. And an override could be exploitable, before long every network packet would have the NSA signature on it. Net Neutrality solves all that. Plus, they wouldn't want ISPs to do anything to impede nefarious character's ability to freely surf the internet and hang themselves...
The site's comments are driven by a Facebook login, I won't touch those with a 10-ft pole. Any site so brain dead as to think that would ever be appropriate has got nothing to say I want to hear.
Since a Kickstarter project doesn't usually have the benefit of a reputation, they're ripe for scam artists and huckster/hype factories. Then again, that HAS actually established a reputation. For Kickstarter/Indiegogo/etc. projects in general. Even ones that do what they say they're going to do can boil down to overhyped junk. Take the Om One, Leap Motion, or Midi PUC for example. They do what they say they can do. But it's like, so what, what they say they can do turns out to be pretty lame, it's just their marketing made it seem like something really hot.
Managers aren't scientists. They're bureaucrats, or politicians, or bean counters or some combination of those. And they're in charge because they dispense the paychecks. If a methodology takes any significant understanding to make it work, it's too complex for its target audience. That is why every few years a new fad methodology with a new set of buzzwords sweeps through, sold by the latest round of salesmen who make a killing on it. But when it boils down to it, it's just another bit of voodoo ritual that the managers are expecting will solve all their problems-- because before that, the problem was-- "you're doing it wrong."
Agile is just another ritual. And what is ritual? Abandoning the ends and embracing the means. Someone claims Agile is the way to go and the suits have found their latest ritual. There is no comprehension, it's just a superstitious cargo cult.
Bureaucrats hate "Agile" because they perceive they have less control over the process. Which is true, but only in a way. They may have a bit less control over the process, but they still control the product, which is really the whole point.
Micromanagement is bad. Waterfall is micromanagement in action.
My experience with Agile has been the bureaucrats transformed it into just another vehicle for micromanagement. In some ways, an even better vehicle for that than ever before. Daily standups? Sprints? Grooming? Burndown charts? Perfect for micromanagers.
You mean Agile development, like the free market, isn't the answer to the world's problems? How can that be? Just wait until I bring that up at today's standup. The scrum master will be aghast...
If American tech companies DON'T put effective encryption on their devices, we'll all be buying tech products from foreign companies that do. GET USED TO IT.
Yes, and note that when you have excess, likely your neighbor has too, and when you need backup, likely so will your neighbor, so getting the excesses to those who need it is going to require some long distance distribution.
Off grid systems are significantly more expensive than grid-tied systems. And off-grid systems will have to have sufficient battery to run for days in bad weather if there's no grid to rely on. And even worse in areas where bad weather is more common. Your "viable, cost-wise" comment is just blowing smoke, possibly true in some parts of the country, but certainly not universal.
Salesmen have been traversing my neighborhood with a grid-tied system that has no batteries pitched to be the same cost as my current power bill. It's a scam, but there may be people who are falling for it, and I don't think it's illegal, they can provide what they say they can at least until the power companies decide it's not working on their end. The power company can't afford to be the battery for everyone, at some point the economics for them breaks down. And when will the power companies decide to stop giving you credit for your excess power they can't use (and can't store)? The whole grid-tied credit bit only works when there aren't too many people using it...
Except that a large number of these solar electric plans are grid-tied systems that attempt to use the power company as its battery. I recently was offered a system where they would simply collect my electric bill payment instead of the power company, and in exchange they would install a grid-tied solar system that would provide my power. Such systems are scams in my opinion, as the economics don't work long term for the power companies which remain in the equation. These scamsters can't afford to make the same deal for off-grid systems because the batteries eat up their profits. Not only are the power companies mad at these deals, they have a right to be and in fact, I'm mad about them as well because they're attempting to profit off a disruptive technology at both the power company's and my expense-- my expense because I would remain dependent on the power company, just differently while the scamsters skim off the profits-- when the power company can't make it work anymore, I'll be one of the ones adversely affected.
We don't arrest people for making bad investments.
What the Fed does is bail them out, instead. Now that, I would argue, is what was criminal in this case, because it transferred liabilities from the investors to the taxpayers...
You missed my point. The FBI doesn't CARE about door locks because they're easy to beat. They could very well behave differently about them if they were actually secure. Encryption is only an issue for the FBI if it works, backdoored encryption they're fine with. Since your door locks essentially have a back door, you'll not see them complaining about them. Mr. Comey might very well disagree with "strong" locks on houses, but since there isn't a mass movement to move to them like there is to encrypted communications, he has no reason to make an issue of it.
It's probably just theater-- they want you to think Android and iOS are secure so we all don't start buying phones with OSes from companies based outside the US where they can't, nudge-nudge, wink-wink, their way into a back door. Or just get rid of the smart phone entirely... They want you to USE it, and think that it's secure, even when it's not. Otherwise they'd actually have to start working for a living again...
I moved to a quiet small town whose police dept doesn't have air power. That's why it's quiet. Police don't seem to have too much trouble catching the bad guys without it. And you're telling me we're going to have drones buzzing overhead? Some of the good-ol'-boys around here are gonna go skeet shootin', I betcha...
Slashdot Mirror
When I started the lead programmer had a degree in Nuclear Physics and insisted on coding his own text editor and assembler from scratch-- the assembler using his own mnemonics. Consequently, it was incompatible with any commercial product we might consider moving to later. The guy never dealt with ANY other code written by anyone. He also didn't have any error handling, which as a user, HE didn't need. My first project was to add error handling so someone could use the stuff besides him. He never used that error checking version tho. There are still apps out there running today written in the higher level language the guy designed at the time. It could run business apps in as little as 4K RAM per user. When we finally hosted it on Unix it scaled up really well...
Of course they want Net Neutrality. Without it, the NSA would have to impose an override, something they'd just as soon not have to do because word would get out and it would be unpopular. I mean, throttling NSA packets just wouldn't do. And an override could be exploitable, before long every network packet would have the NSA signature on it. Net Neutrality solves all that. Plus, they wouldn't want ISPs to do anything to impede nefarious character's ability to freely surf the internet and hang themselves...
So they've figured out that conservatives are more chickenshit than liberals. This is news?
The site's comments are driven by a Facebook login, I won't touch those with a 10-ft pole. Any site so brain dead as to think that would ever be appropriate has got nothing to say I want to hear.
I wish we could say the same about social networking and get it out of the hands of Facebook...
Since a Kickstarter project doesn't usually have the benefit of a reputation, they're ripe for scam artists and huckster/hype factories. Then again, that HAS actually established a reputation. For Kickstarter/Indiegogo/etc. projects in general. Even ones that do what they say they're going to do can boil down to overhyped junk. Take the Om One, Leap Motion, or Midi PUC for example. They do what they say they can do. But it's like, so what, what they say they can do turns out to be pretty lame, it's just their marketing made it seem like something really hot.
Managers aren't scientists. They're bureaucrats, or politicians, or bean counters or some combination of those. And they're in charge because they dispense the paychecks. If a methodology takes any significant understanding to make it work, it's too complex for its target audience. That is why every few years a new fad methodology with a new set of buzzwords sweeps through, sold by the latest round of salesmen who make a killing on it. But when it boils down to it, it's just another bit of voodoo ritual that the managers are expecting will solve all their problems-- because before that, the problem was-- "you're doing it wrong."
Agile is just another ritual. And what is ritual? Abandoning the ends and embracing the means. Someone claims Agile is the way to go and the suits have found their latest ritual. There is no comprehension, it's just a superstitious cargo cult.
Bureaucrats hate "Agile" because they perceive they have less control over the process. Which is true, but only in a way. They may have a bit less control over the process, but they still control the product, which is really the whole point. Micromanagement is bad. Waterfall is micromanagement in action.
My experience with Agile has been the bureaucrats transformed it into just another vehicle for micromanagement. In some ways, an even better vehicle for that than ever before. Daily standups? Sprints? Grooming? Burndown charts? Perfect for micromanagers.
You mean Agile development, like the free market, isn't the answer to the world's problems? How can that be? Just wait until I bring that up at today's standup. The scrum master will be aghast...
Yes, I'm still trying to figure out if it would be better to cover my roof with solar cells, or to just paint it white.
If Microsoft decides to ping BofA to determine if the internet is alive, that'd be just about right.
If American tech companies DON'T put effective encryption on their devices, we'll all be buying tech products from foreign companies that do. GET USED TO IT.
Yes, and note that when you have excess, likely your neighbor has too, and when you need backup, likely so will your neighbor, so getting the excesses to those who need it is going to require some long distance distribution.
Off grid systems are significantly more expensive than grid-tied systems. And off-grid systems will have to have sufficient battery to run for days in bad weather if there's no grid to rely on. And even worse in areas where bad weather is more common. Your "viable, cost-wise" comment is just blowing smoke, possibly true in some parts of the country, but certainly not universal.
Salesmen have been traversing my neighborhood with a grid-tied system that has no batteries pitched to be the same cost as my current power bill. It's a scam, but there may be people who are falling for it, and I don't think it's illegal, they can provide what they say they can at least until the power companies decide it's not working on their end. The power company can't afford to be the battery for everyone, at some point the economics for them breaks down. And when will the power companies decide to stop giving you credit for your excess power they can't use (and can't store)? The whole grid-tied credit bit only works when there aren't too many people using it...
Except that a large number of these solar electric plans are grid-tied systems that attempt to use the power company as its battery. I recently was offered a system where they would simply collect my electric bill payment instead of the power company, and in exchange they would install a grid-tied solar system that would provide my power. Such systems are scams in my opinion, as the economics don't work long term for the power companies which remain in the equation. These scamsters can't afford to make the same deal for off-grid systems because the batteries eat up their profits. Not only are the power companies mad at these deals, they have a right to be and in fact, I'm mad about them as well because they're attempting to profit off a disruptive technology at both the power company's and my expense-- my expense because I would remain dependent on the power company, just differently while the scamsters skim off the profits-- when the power company can't make it work anymore, I'll be one of the ones adversely affected.
We don't arrest people for making bad investments.
What the Fed does is bail them out, instead. Now that, I would argue, is what was criminal in this case, because it transferred liabilities from the investors to the taxpayers...
You missed my point. The FBI doesn't CARE about door locks because they're easy to beat. They could very well behave differently about them if they were actually secure. Encryption is only an issue for the FBI if it works, backdoored encryption they're fine with. Since your door locks essentially have a back door, you'll not see them complaining about them. Mr. Comey might very well disagree with "strong" locks on houses, but since there isn't a mass movement to move to them like there is to encrypted communications, he has no reason to make an issue of it.
You are aware that the vast majority of front door locks on homes wouldn't keep out an orangutan with a toothpick, aren't you?
Bump Key Howto
He's FBI, not a lawyer, for chrissakes. What do they know about what's legal?
It's probably just theater-- they want you to think Android and iOS are secure so we all don't start buying phones with OSes from companies based outside the US where they can't, nudge-nudge, wink-wink, their way into a back door. Or just get rid of the smart phone entirely... They want you to USE it, and think that it's secure, even when it's not. Otherwise they'd actually have to start working for a living again...
What the hell did these guys do before smartphones existed? Oh yeah, that's right, WORK FOR A LIVING.
I moved to a quiet small town whose police dept doesn't have air power. That's why it's quiet. Police don't seem to have too much trouble catching the bad guys without it. And you're telling me we're going to have drones buzzing overhead? Some of the good-ol'-boys around here are gonna go skeet shootin', I betcha...
Yeah, but what a way to go...