Plus either you move the cancellation circuitry into the headset, which makes it bulkier (and compatible with everything, so you have new cool headset and another generic phone), or you keep it minimal and need extra data lines to generate the noise cancellation control through the circuitry in the phone.
It can be considered as piecework, not paid hourly but for completion of the task. If they manage to complete the task, the amount will be added to their first paycheck. If they fail to deliver - what's there to pay for?
Several hours past the point where an AI is capable of looking up the right solution on the net, downloading a snippet, adapting it to the surrounding code and including it into that code, everyone will be replaced by that AI.
It's NEVER a problem for which no part can be researched online. Unless you start your programming work by taking a shovel to the beach to dig up sand for silicon for the chip that will run your code, partial solutions will always be available on-line. Language specifications. Data sheets. Protocol RFCs. White papers on the algorithm. There may be no solution for this specific problem but there will be tools helping finding it, and guides how to approach it.
Formulating the correct questions is half the work.
Give the guy a piece of code to debug. On screen, using the debugger. Oh, just a snapshot of your code two revisions ago, when you found that nasty bug.
Give them a piece of code written by that one jerk who believed in making his own job secure, tell to clean it up and add comments.
Hand customer's specs, present a couple solutions, "pick the best one, make an case about it." Just stuff collected from a meeting three years ago.
This piece of code is underperforming. Find the bottleneck.
from the whole hype they created about the 'new revolutionary platform' while it's not a revolution, it's a quirk - a one-off short run that won't happen again anytime soon because the whole shebang is based on a single end-of-life sale of an obsolete chip.
You can't base production around rpi0. You can't base a long-term system on it as replacements will be impossible. It won't last, it won't expand. It's not sustainable.
It's like you claiming "I have found a new revolutionary method to get rich quick; $6600 per hour!" - when in fact you found a single $10 note on the street, 5 seconds of work, the end.
And here you both argue the chicken and the egg problem, and you both are wrong.
Hardware and software go hand in hand. One pushes the other as much as the other pushes the first.
Turing did a lot of computer science and information theory developments that were ahead of his time, because there was no hardware capable of implementing them.
Fleming, developing the first vacuum tube diode, had no idea it would be later used to perform computations.
That was in the pioneering times. Currently, it's a constant push. Faster processors, to run available software faster. More elaborate software, making use of the new capabilities provided by the new processors. And again, faster processors to enable that software to run faster.
ID software pushed the CPU to its limits with Doom and Quake. Then 3dfx Voodoo was released, to offload the processor, and allow even more elaborate games. More advanced games pushed more advanced GPUs... and then protein folding happened. Computations that could take decades, finished within weeks, thanks to special purpose processors invented for gaming.
This is a joint progress, happening on too many fronts simultaneously, too many advances both contributing and demanding more advances, that trying to discretize it and say 'this before this' is silly.
I'm arguing that responding to a report of a hostage situation and treating it with full seriousness of actual hostage situation, dispatching the designated unit and handling the situation according to the procedures without shade of assumption this is just a stupid prank is the correct course of action. "Dispatch did nothing wrong."
I'm absolutely not arguing that the designated unit is best for this kind of work, or that the procedures - or behavior outside of these procedures - is any good. Simply put, SWAT is way too trigger-happy, arrogant and violent, escalating situations that would be better handled peacefully, shooting even when it's absolutely not needed, and generally I begin to doubt they are even making the baseline I've outlined - whether the cure isn't worse than the disease.
Still, SWAT is like it is. Lousy as hell, but all you have for this stuff. In this situation limiting the interventions to *actual* threat would vastly reduce the number of innocents harmed. Meanwhile, if getting SWAT sent to innocent people, with full premeditation, is met with a slap on the wrist, "swatting" will only get more popular.
As long as the number of people saved exceeds the number of people wrongly killed, then the intervention is justified. Accidents happen always. Currently, they happen excessively often and it's a worrisome trend which should be corrected, but only when SWAT kills more innocents than would people SWAT is called to, it needs to be dissolved entirely.
While the police reaction was justified, the situation so often turns to the "wrong" target dead, that 3 years of probation for exposing someone to this kind of danger is a joke.
It shouldn't be that the police doesn't react to reports of hostage situations. It should be that nobody ever knowingly, falsely reports such a situation - for fear of the consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
Plus either you move the cancellation circuitry into the headset, which makes it bulkier (and compatible with everything, so you have new cool headset and another generic phone), or you keep it minimal and need extra data lines to generate the noise cancellation control through the circuitry in the phone.
It can be considered as piecework, not paid hourly but for completion of the task. If they manage to complete the task, the amount will be added to their first paycheck. If they fail to deliver - what's there to pay for?
Several hours past the point where an AI is capable of looking up the right solution on the net, downloading a snippet, adapting it to the surrounding code and including it into that code, everyone will be replaced by that AI.
If the resulting code is worth the check, they do.
It's NEVER a problem for which no part can be researched online. Unless you start your programming work by taking a shovel to the beach to dig up sand for silicon for the chip that will run your code, partial solutions will always be available on-line. Language specifications. Data sheets. Protocol RFCs. White papers on the algorithm. There may be no solution for this specific problem but there will be tools helping finding it, and guides how to approach it.
Formulating the correct questions is half the work.
They found out he was the oil reservoir engineer at McDonald's, preparing fries?
but aims at being a politician... and pretends to be one.
yup, me bad
That subroutine will be implemented at inline. And the compiler will reduce it to a single CPU instruction.
Typical SJW hijack. Occupy Wall Street went down the crapper the same way.
Give the guy a piece of code to debug. On screen, using the debugger. Oh, just a snapshot of your code two revisions ago, when you found that nasty bug.
Give them a piece of code written by that one jerk who believed in making his own job secure, tell to clean it up and add comments.
Hand customer's specs, present a couple solutions, "pick the best one, make an case about it." Just stuff collected from a meeting three years ago.
This piece of code is underperforming. Find the bottleneck.
More accurately, hijack a news item and twist it to fit their cause.
No, BubbleSort has perfectly valid application!
if (x.length() < 4)
{
if(x[0]>x[1]) swap(x[0],x[1]);
if(x[1]>x[2]) swap(x[1],x[2]);
if(x[0]>x[1]) swap(x[0],x[1]);
}
else throw( wrongSortAlgorithmChoiceException );
(yep, BubbleSort is about the fastest sort algorithm for tiny sets of data.)
Sins, not fetishes.
Exactly! Just a politician!
One possible: customers breaking their devices through shell and then demanding warranty repairs.
from the whole hype they created about the 'new revolutionary platform' while it's not a revolution, it's a quirk - a one-off short run that won't happen again anytime soon because the whole shebang is based on a single end-of-life sale of an obsolete chip.
You can't base production around rpi0. You can't base a long-term system on it as replacements will be impossible. It won't last, it won't expand. It's not sustainable.
It's like you claiming "I have found a new revolutionary method to get rich quick; $6600 per hour!" - when in fact you found a single $10 note on the street, 5 seconds of work, the end.
define 'easily'
> Limit one per order and no free shipping, though.
Standard practice to hide your mark-up in shipping&handling costs.
Seven planets - check.
Exceptionally compact solar system - check.
Exceptionally small star - check.
Try to check if the sixth planet is a gas giant with five moons. Or try to determine if the second planet is purple!
And here you both argue the chicken and the egg problem, and you both are wrong.
Hardware and software go hand in hand. One pushes the other as much as the other pushes the first.
Turing did a lot of computer science and information theory developments that were ahead of his time, because there was no hardware capable of implementing them.
Fleming, developing the first vacuum tube diode, had no idea it would be later used to perform computations.
That was in the pioneering times. Currently, it's a constant push. Faster processors, to run available software faster. More elaborate software, making use of the new capabilities provided by the new processors. And again, faster processors to enable that software to run faster.
ID software pushed the CPU to its limits with Doom and Quake. Then 3dfx Voodoo was released, to offload the processor, and allow even more elaborate games. More advanced games pushed more advanced GPUs... and then protein folding happened. Computations that could take decades, finished within weeks, thanks to special purpose processors invented for gaming.
This is a joint progress, happening on too many fronts simultaneously, too many advances both contributing and demanding more advances, that trying to discretize it and say 'this before this' is silly.
I'm arguing that responding to a report of a hostage situation and treating it with full seriousness of actual hostage situation, dispatching the designated unit and handling the situation according to the procedures without shade of assumption this is just a stupid prank is the correct course of action. "Dispatch did nothing wrong."
I'm absolutely not arguing that the designated unit is best for this kind of work, or that the procedures - or behavior outside of these procedures - is any good. Simply put, SWAT is way too trigger-happy, arrogant and violent, escalating situations that would be better handled peacefully, shooting even when it's absolutely not needed, and generally I begin to doubt they are even making the baseline I've outlined - whether the cure isn't worse than the disease.
Still, SWAT is like it is. Lousy as hell, but all you have for this stuff. In this situation limiting the interventions to *actual* threat would vastly reduce the number of innocents harmed. Meanwhile, if getting SWAT sent to innocent people, with full premeditation, is met with a slap on the wrist, "swatting" will only get more popular.
As long as the number of people saved exceeds the number of people wrongly killed, then the intervention is justified. Accidents happen always. Currently, they happen excessively often and it's a worrisome trend which should be corrected, but only when SWAT kills more innocents than would people SWAT is called to, it needs to be dissolved entirely.
While the police reaction was justified, the situation so often turns to the "wrong" target dead, that 3 years of probation for exposing someone to this kind of danger is a joke.
It shouldn't be that the police doesn't react to reports of hostage situations. It should be that nobody ever knowingly, falsely reports such a situation - for fear of the consequences.
I wish you were right.