That's a tough one. But I thought maybe if you left the laptop in there a while, it would melt, and all the pieces could jam up the drain valve at the bottom, preventing anyone from draining the oil.
I would think you could rescue it with a chisel. The fryer, not your data.
Do you sit down with your lawyer everytime you sign a contract? Where do you draw the line?
Well there's a cost associated with reviewing with your lawyer. It costs time and money. There's also a cost if you were to get screwed on a contract. If the potential cost of getting screwed on the contract is significantly greater, then you get a lawyer to review it.
If your cellphone company screws you and doesn't give you your minutes, you might loose a couple hundred bucks. Not a big deal so I wouldn't have it reviewed. If they screw me, I eat the cost and don't do business with them again.
Work contracts have liability that could easily be 5-6-7 figures, so it is clearly prudent to have it reviewed.
You note that "in general contracting agreement's aren't that complicated." How do you know that?
To clarify, it isn't that complicated within the context of which we are speaking. Want benefits? Put it in the contract. Want an overtime rate? Put it in the contract. What you are legally entitled to implicitly, I have no idea, so as a precaution I want to see it in writing.
This concept isn't that complicated. I'm sure there are other subjects which are more complicated.
You seem to have an expectation that companies will give you stuff just because you think, after the fact, that your contract wasn't fair. This is something to deal with before you sign, not after.
Or are you saying that before you sign any contract, you need to sit down with a lawyer and make sure everything is as it should be?
Bingo. That just nullifies the rest of your post. We aren't expected to understand contracts, which is why you show it to your lawyer. Especially if you are signing a contracting agreement where the regulations protecting you are substantially less. To quote yourself, "ignorance of the law is no excuse".
Of course in general contracting agreement's aren't that complicated. General rule, if it doesn't explicity state it in the contract, you don't get it. Want vacation? Put it in the contract. Want overtime? Guess what you need to do.
I guess irrational exuberance can take you a long way before you realise that buying your cat food online and having it freighted to you isn't actually terribly efficient.
A popular saying "markets can stay irrational far longer than you can stay solvent betting against them". Even if we knew we were in a real estate bubble, selling could still not be the best course of action.
who is going to buy all of the commodities China is pumping out since the market is already saturated.
When you say 'commodities', are you referring to retail items like at Walmart? I believe China is a net importer of commodities, like steel, oil, coffee, uranium etc..
Sure, everyone needs a place to live, so real estate will never go to 0. However if everyone with a 100% mortgage on their 50ft lot sells, and moves in to a 2 bedroom apartment, there's going to be major pain.
If the pyramid starts to fall, real estate will take out oil coal and steel, and there will be a rush to gold as the only remaining store of wealth. I think it's premature to load up on gold, but keep your finger on the trigger.
This is amateur advice so heed it at your own risk.
I lived in Vancouver, BC for a couple of months a few years ago.
I've lived in Vancouver for 32 years, and I think you did not get an accurate picture in your couple of months. There is great outrage whenever scandal shows up. The provincial NDP party was recently voted into oblivion due to scandal. No premiere has survived re-election for as long as I can remember. The federal Liberals went from massively dominant to a minority government due to scandal.
There was the
bingogate scandal
fast ferries scandal
sponsorship scandal
casinogate scandal
tainted blood scandal
strippergate
The list goes on. If I was to complain about something, it would be about too much scandal.
Your central point of redundancy as a method of verification is interesting, and has some merit. However I cannot see how you can practically implement such an idea.
There are three points where I cannot see a solution. One, as you point out, there is no method by which you can guarantee that code1 and code2 are equivalent. This can be done by a programmer, but this is extremely difficult. If a programmer was to validate the two code bases against each other, they might as well compare code1 to customer expectation. I don't see that your method simplifies this at all. You mention that this step is potentially automatable. While I agree, I don't see this technology as imminent.
Two, your idea depends on being able to fully describe a problem with two divergent, sort of orthogonal, languages. However I don't see that such languages exist. Programming languages, with exceptions in only small details, represent similar thinking methodology. It doesn't matter if I write:
for (int i=0; i<top; i++)
or
for i = 0 to top
or
//loop through all array elements
These represent identical thinking. There is nothing divergent or orthogonal here. Any documentation which is sufficiently detailed to fully describe the program will resemble pseudo code, and will thus become useless in your scheme.
Since both code bases represent identical thinking, if a programmer introduces a line level bug into code1, then the programmer has performed a logical fallacy, but then will likely perform the same fallacy when writing code2.
It seems to me that what you should do is define a language which implements, automates and enforces this redundancy. You will have to create a second syntax which is so divergent from current thinking as to be revolutionary.
Three, I don't see this system doing much about the more nefarious bugs, what I think of as second order bugs. First order being a logic error on a line of code. Second order being where you have two functions/classes/programs, which by themselves work correctly. However they make some incorrect assumption about each other and thus perform incorrectly together. This doesn't represent a disconnect between programmer and code, but a lack of comprehension within only the programmer.
If you have successfully implemented such a system somewhere, I would like to read about that if there is any literature on it.
Re:The Problem With XML
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
What is inefficient about machine-parsing of XML
Well among other problems, you typically have to parse & load the whole document in order to extract even a single piece of information. A DOM parser operates thus. A SAX parser may let you read from the top to where your data is.
Contrast this with a binary format where you could navigate directly to your data and read a value. Imagine if you had to parse your whole database file in order to run a select statement.
Labels are like OPEC...there's no competitive pricing among providers, just THE price for the product
Actually there is competetive pricing among dozens of grades of crude oil. Sweet, sour, brent, north sea, oilsands, Saudi etc... The saudis recently lowered their discount on Saudi Sour because they had more supply of that grade.
OPEC does have elevated levels of influence over global oil prices since they control 40% of world output. But there definitely is more than one product.
I once had Visual Studio crash... it blew away close to 2 days worth of work...What if that would have been the one time I'd have met a woman drunk enough to have sex with me?
I have it on good authority that women don't have sex with people who don't regularly check in their work with Visual SourceSafe
Why does "ActiveX virus scanner" sound like an oxymoron?
It makes sense. Spyware companies use ActiveX because they need a high level of access to your system in order to infest it. It follows that you would need at least that level of access to scan for the resulting infestation.
The problem doesn't go away, you've just painted the problem all pretty so you don't pay attention to it.
The problem of getting viruses on the net does go away if you take reasonable precautions.
Sure, MS should build a secure OS. Also, that robber who broke into my house a few years ago should give me my stuff back. Also you should be able to walk SF's Tenderloin after dark in a halter, leather mini & fishnets, without risk to yourself.
But until the bad people in the world spontaneously change their ways, individuals will have to take precautions against evil.
Can someone explain to me again why I have to buy another piece of hardware to compensate for flaws inherent in my computer's software? Am I missing something here?
Yeah, fault vs. personal responsibility. It's MS fault that the OS is crappy. But if you take personal responsibility the problem goes away. The same can be said for so many things in life.
I'm sure you are correct, I don't really want to go through case law. I was objecting to the blanket statement that hearsay and evidence obtained illegally are allowed. In general, they are not, with some exceptions. There are also exceptions in the US. Statements against penal interest, and evidence illegally obtained, but that would have inevitably been discovered, for example.
1. Hearsay evidence is admissable in a CRIMINAL trial (in the states hearsay is only admissible in a civil trial).
2. Evidence gathered without a search warrent or even probable case is addmissble in a CRIMINAL trial (in the states this is a big no no, it is tossed out period).
And wire the speakers with MonsterCable or similar
Monster Cable is the Microsoft of the cable industry. Use something else, anything else. They are also sue happy, going after businesses with "monster" in their name.
Everyone seems to question why this is even neccesary. Well it isn't, but if you are a camera geek, like the OS geeks of yore, you can get more out of your hardware by writing your own software/firmware. So what could one do with writing your own firmware? Off the top of my head:
Improve metering in extreme situations, like back-lit
Vary jpg compression quality.
Add support for some RAW format, instead of jpg.
Invent your own RAW format.
Customize post processing parameters, like sharpness, saturation etc...
Flash intensity compensation
Add a BULB mode
Add in servo autofocus capability
Sure, some hardware wouldn't support some of these, but a decent dSLR would, and people have already done their own firmware tweaks for the Canon Digital Rebel, to implement some of what I have mentioned.
Slashdot Mirror
How the hell do you destroy a deep fryer?
That's a tough one. But I thought maybe if you left the laptop in there a while, it would melt, and all the pieces could jam up the drain valve at the bottom, preventing anyone from draining the oil.
I would think you could rescue it with a chisel. The fryer, not your data.
Do you sit down with your lawyer everytime you sign a contract? Where do you draw the line?
Well there's a cost associated with reviewing with your lawyer. It costs time and money. There's also a cost if you were to get screwed on a contract. If the potential cost of getting screwed on the contract is significantly greater, then you get a lawyer to review it.
If your cellphone company screws you and doesn't give you your minutes, you might loose a couple hundred bucks. Not a big deal so I wouldn't have it reviewed. If they screw me, I eat the cost and don't do business with them again.
Work contracts have liability that could easily be 5-6-7 figures, so it is clearly prudent to have it reviewed.
You note that "in general contracting agreement's aren't that complicated." How do you know that?
To clarify, it isn't that complicated within the context of which we are speaking. Want benefits? Put it in the contract. Want an overtime rate? Put it in the contract. What you are legally entitled to implicitly, I have no idea, so as a precaution I want to see it in writing.
This concept isn't that complicated. I'm sure there are other subjects which are more complicated.
You seem to have an expectation that companies will give you stuff just because you think, after the fact, that your contract wasn't fair. This is something to deal with before you sign, not after.
Or are you saying that before you sign any contract, you need to sit down with a lawyer and make sure everything is as it should be?
Bingo. That just nullifies the rest of your post. We aren't expected to understand contracts, which is why you show it to your lawyer. Especially if you are signing a contracting agreement where the regulations protecting you are substantially less. To quote yourself, "ignorance of the law is no excuse".
Of course in general contracting agreement's aren't that complicated. General rule, if it doesn't explicity state it in the contract, you don't get it. Want vacation? Put it in the contract. Want overtime? Guess what you need to do.
I guess irrational exuberance can take you a long way before you realise that buying your cat food online and having it freighted to you isn't actually terribly efficient.
A popular saying "markets can stay irrational far longer than you can stay solvent betting against them". Even if we knew we were in a real estate bubble, selling could still not be the best course of action.
who is going to buy all of the commodities China is pumping out since the market is already saturated.
When you say 'commodities', are you referring to retail items like at Walmart? I believe China is a net importer of commodities, like steel, oil, coffee, uranium etc..
After all, what else of value besides land is left?
Oil, coal, steel and gold
Sure, everyone needs a place to live, so real estate will never go to 0. However if everyone with a 100% mortgage on their 50ft lot sells, and moves in to a 2 bedroom apartment, there's going to be major pain.
If the pyramid starts to fall, real estate will take out oil coal and steel, and there will be a rush to gold as the only remaining store of wealth. I think it's premature to load up on gold, but keep your finger on the trigger.
This is amateur advice so heed it at your own risk.
It's because we Canadians waffle so much (we don't want missle defense! but we still want a business realtionship with the US)
That's a bunch of crap, and I won't waffle on that observation. You are propagating an unwarranted stereotype of your own country.
Anyways how is your example waffling. I would call it common sense.
I lived in Vancouver, BC for a couple of months a few years ago.
I've lived in Vancouver for 32 years, and I think you did not get an accurate picture in your couple of months. There is great outrage whenever scandal shows up. The provincial NDP party was recently voted into oblivion due to scandal. No premiere has survived re-election for as long as I can remember. The federal Liberals went from massively dominant to a minority government due to scandal.
There was the
bingogate scandal
fast ferries scandal
sponsorship scandal
casinogate scandal
tainted blood scandal
strippergate
The list goes on. If I was to complain about something, it would be about too much scandal.
- I'm not allowed to have facial hair, wierd haircuts (dreads count as wierd), tattoos, peircings, etc.
So on your last day, go in as this guy
So are you gonna tell us the company name or what. Somebody do it AC at least.
Your central point of redundancy as a method of verification is interesting, and has some merit. However I cannot see how you can practically implement such an idea.
//loop through all array elements
There are three points where I cannot see a solution. One, as you point out, there is no method by which you can guarantee that code1 and code2 are equivalent. This can be done by a programmer, but this is extremely difficult. If a programmer was to validate the two code bases against each other, they might as well compare code1 to customer expectation. I don't see that your method simplifies this at all. You mention that this step is potentially automatable. While I agree, I don't see this technology as imminent.
Two, your idea depends on being able to fully describe a problem with two divergent, sort of orthogonal, languages. However I don't see that such languages exist. Programming languages, with exceptions in only small details, represent similar thinking methodology. It doesn't matter if I write:
for (int i=0; i<top; i++)
or
for i = 0 to top
or
These represent identical thinking. There is nothing divergent or orthogonal here. Any documentation which is sufficiently detailed to fully describe the program will resemble pseudo code, and will thus become useless in your scheme.
Since both code bases represent identical thinking, if a programmer introduces a line level bug into code1, then the programmer has performed a logical fallacy, but then will likely perform the same fallacy when writing code2.
It seems to me that what you should do is define a language which implements, automates and enforces this redundancy. You will have to create a second syntax which is so divergent from current thinking as to be revolutionary.
Three, I don't see this system doing much about the more nefarious bugs, what I think of as second order bugs. First order being a logic error on a line of code. Second order being where you have two functions/classes/programs, which by themselves work correctly. However they make some incorrect assumption about each other and thus perform incorrectly together. This doesn't represent a disconnect between programmer and code, but a lack of comprehension within only the programmer.
If you have successfully implemented such a system somewhere, I would like to read about that if there is any literature on it.
What is inefficient about machine-parsing of XML
Well among other problems, you typically have to parse & load the whole document in order to extract even a single piece of information. A DOM parser operates thus. A SAX parser may let you read from the top to where your data is.
Contrast this with a binary format where you could navigate directly to your data and read a value. Imagine if you had to parse your whole database file in order to run a select statement.
Labels are like OPEC...there's no competitive pricing among providers, just THE price for the product
Actually there is competetive pricing among dozens of grades of crude oil. Sweet, sour, brent, north sea, oilsands, Saudi etc... The saudis recently lowered their discount on Saudi Sour because they had more supply of that grade.
OPEC does have elevated levels of influence over global oil prices since they control 40% of world output. But there definitely is more than one product.
oil grades
I once had Visual Studio crash... it blew away close to 2 days worth of work...What if that would have been the one time I'd have met a woman drunk enough to have sex with me?
I have it on good authority that women don't have sex with people who don't regularly check in their work with Visual SourceSafe
You know, your idiotic attempt to slam Bush would have been better if you spelles KETONES correctly.
Yeah let him have it! He sure misunderestimated you!
And I'm sorry, what does a person with a BA in Medievial history have to do with being the CEO of a tech company?
Absolutely. BAs in history can only be Presidents of major countries
In the absence of international support, the only "stir" I get is what I'm doing with my coffee at the moment.
I searched for "Vancouver BC" and it correctly located me in Canada. Try that with mapquest, and it thinks I live somewhere in Kansas!
Why does "ActiveX virus scanner" sound like an oxymoron?
It makes sense. Spyware companies use ActiveX because they need a high level of access to your system in order to infest it. It follows that you would need at least that level of access to scan for the resulting infestation.
I don't use antivirus software and have never gotten a virus yet.
I guess you also have no mirror, but know you look great?
Or you could go to Symantec's site and use their online ActiveX virus scanner.
The problem doesn't go away, you've just painted the problem all pretty so you don't pay attention to it.
The problem of getting viruses on the net does go away if you take reasonable precautions.
Sure, MS should build a secure OS. Also, that robber who broke into my house a few years ago should give me my stuff back. Also you should be able to walk SF's Tenderloin after dark in a halter, leather mini & fishnets, without risk to yourself.
But until the bad people in the world spontaneously change their ways, individuals will have to take precautions against evil.
Can someone explain to me again why I have to buy another piece of hardware to compensate for flaws inherent in my computer's software? Am I missing something here?
Yeah, fault vs. personal responsibility. It's MS fault that the OS is crappy. But if you take personal responsibility the problem goes away. The same can be said for so many things in life.
Hmmm, I don't belive hearsay is allowed in criminal cases in the US period.
Here's a summary of hearsay and exceptions in the US. Similar to Canada.
I'm sure you are correct, I don't really want to go through case law. I was objecting to the blanket statement that hearsay and evidence obtained illegally are allowed. In general, they are not, with some exceptions. There are also exceptions in the US. Statements against penal interest, and evidence illegally obtained, but that would have inevitably been discovered, for example.
1. Hearsay evidence is admissable in a CRIMINAL trial (in the states hearsay is only admissible in a civil trial).
2. Evidence gathered without a search warrent or even probable case is addmissble in a CRIMINAL trial (in the states this is a big no no, it is tossed out period).
incorrect.
And wire the speakers with MonsterCable or similar
Monster Cable is the Microsoft of the cable industry. Use something else, anything else. They are also sue happy, going after businesses with "monster" in their name.
Everyone seems to question why this is even neccesary. Well it isn't, but if you are a camera geek, like the OS geeks of yore, you can get more out of your hardware by writing your own software/firmware. So what could one do with writing your own firmware? Off the top of my head:
Improve metering in extreme situations, like back-lit
Vary jpg compression quality.
Add support for some RAW format, instead of jpg.
Invent your own RAW format.
Customize post processing parameters, like sharpness, saturation etc...
Flash intensity compensation
Add a BULB mode
Add in servo autofocus capability
Sure, some hardware wouldn't support some of these, but a decent dSLR would, and people have already done their own firmware tweaks for the Canon Digital Rebel, to implement some of what I have mentioned.