analysing particle physics data is a technically complex programming task but raises no ethical issues
Someone could use this data to devise a new super-weapon.
Everything is ethically complex if you really want to be neurotic about it, and TFA seems to be very focused on being neurotic about all the things. I mean someone seriously took a Hollywood representation of a coder seriously, when any of us who do this work for a living know that person resembles as much our job as Riggs and Murtaugh represented detective work.
Using your example exactly: the kind of coder analyzing particle physics data is probably a very disjoint personality and skill-set from someone doing javascript for Facebook. He probably has a degree in math or physics, he uses code as a tool to solve a larger problem in physics. In fact the diversity of people who code for a living is apparently not even comprehended by the author. I "code" for a living, but I am actually doing semiconductor design, I consider myself an engineer not a coder, but I write more code than many software engineers I know. I work with people who build compilers and do systems programming, these people mock the "code like a beast" crowd vigorously (and don't get them started on the "C is dead meme", everyone in these fields uses C exclusively).
What I think is lost most in TFA is that coding is actually fun, and the technical challenges are what make it fun. First, the process of decomposition is a creative task, there's often no one right solution but shades of good. Then there's the catharsis: building this elaborate machine that fulfills a complex task, spending days/weeks/months getting it how you want, and letting it rip is better than many drugs. All of this does require intense focus (many people abuse Adderall to acquire this), and it does require rigor...but then a painter who is sloppy in his work does not produce great art either.
The ethical stuff...I'm not denying that it is there sometimes, but often that decision is not ours to make.
Nobody who wants high end anything at all, will buy Huawei instead of almost any other brand.
If I want to give up my iPhone, I will probably get a Samsung. If I want to give up my macbook pro, I will probably get a dell xps. If I want to give up my Mac Pro or iMac, I will build a DIY (which in fact, I have to do anyway for VR).
There is no room in the world for Huawei, they need to go find someone who loves them, preferably somewhere in the convection zone of the Sun.
It would make sense for a government such as China to try to protect its data with its own "security measures".
China should make its own operating system to their own spec, and no one can buy it, and no one can pay their engineers who worked on it, and they can suck it.
No one should be catering to their government's needs, it should be free to fall on its face.
You have a lot of misplaced anger and I think a bad comprehension about why things are like they are, and who precisely is to blame. You blame this "government" a lot, not the people who elected the government with the intention they would enact the rules you so vigorously dislike. You aren't going to be happy anywhere on planet earth like that, because every square inch of land is claimed and governed by some organization. Focus instead of curbing the laws to make sense, and understanding that your freedom is mostly about being able to contribute to that directly and indirectly. Also consider how to make the laws accomplish their goals without unnecessary or poorly thought out restrictions which are orthogonal.
Laws about car performance have no place in the USA. I'm ok with limiting emissions, provided performance isn't touched.
If you want to be reasonable, I'm OK with this statement. However emissions is not the only problem, energy consumption is the other problem you're ignoring. And by virtue of physics, any attempt to limit energy consumption, either via progressive taxation or outright upper limits is going to impose a performance limit. If people flock to these cars in large numbers, it is likely this will need to be done.
Even professional race leagues, both NASCAR and F1 impose performance limits on the vehicles professional drivers, on closed courses can operate their vehicles. The reason is different, but the NASCAR limit at least used to be 725HP, less than what these cars are touting. NASCAR has very few drivers and few events, I don't even know how to calculate the number of how many people are on the roads every day commuting, shopping, travelling, whatever. When you start talking about bad things hundreds of millions of people do on a daily basis, then you have to look a lot more closely at the effects and how to curb them.
I agree curbing performance on street cars is not solving a problem that I am concerned with, but energy efficiency and emissions are problems I worry about.
I think the NFL should remove all pads and switch to touch football. We should have a law. I think the NBA should change their rules so that fouling isn't part of the game. There should be laws for all these things, because they teach that breaking the rules is part of the game.
You are welcome to purchase the NFL or NBA from its owners and change the rules however you like. Maybe give the defensive line pikes and let the offense run around with swords? Go nuts. But, expect that the citizens of whatever country you choose to infest to hold you financially and possibly criminally responsible for whatever happens on the field. Provided the laws exist to ensure that the NFL and NBA have to be responsible for the players, both during and after their usefulness, it seems like no extensive list of laws is required. But if someone gets paralyzed after a really awesome backflip that didn't end well, I expect the NFL is going to pay for him and his family for the rest of his life, and if they don't, you're damned right, we should get in their business. By virtue of this, reasonable businessmen are going to want to ensure their money makers are profitable, that means fewer injuries and they're free to come up with any rules they feel necessary.
The number of companies that bow to pressure to enter the Chinese and Indian markets because of volume, is precisely the same as the number of companies who have declining margins and increasing obsolescence and who get their asses kicked by companies local to (mostly) China. Yes, there are many persons in those country, but they are not rich and they are not good for high margin, premium products. At the same time, I do not know of any company who can simultaneously feed the premium product and the value product efficiently: they either sacrifice one for the other creating mediocrity, or else function as two companies in both technology and business (marketing, sales).
These markets should be avoided at all costs, once you let them in the door they will bleed you dry. If Apple wants to enter China as a value product line, they need to bifurcate and create a lower end product line with a unique brand. Wealthy Chinese will continue to prefer Apple because they know better, whereas the masses, whom Wall St. interests want to cater to, want it but will by the fake Apple brand (Fapple?) if it can deliver superior value to evil bastards like Huawei.
Under no circumstances should any concessions be made for Huawei or products like what they offer. Like Microsoft they are a company that needs to stop existing, be chopped into many pieces and buried at equidistant locations on the earth, no less than 1 mile below the surface with eternally vigilant hell hounds guarding all exits, lest they break free and condemn us all to an eternity of hellfire.
Then the question is who gets to decide which choices are "bad" -- which is generally the government -- which is chosen by the people who would generally like to make there own choices...
Bad choices are those that hurt everyone for the gain of a few, and driving more fuel efficient vehicles is necessary for the long term success of the country in terms of keeping us out of expensive wars, having us destroy our own environment to pump more oil, reducing emissions and just to keep prices down to avoid gas becoming too expensive in a country where not being able to drive may lock you out of employment. When it comes to adding more HP to a car, and the public flocking to those horses rather than fuel efficient vehicles, then it may come time to make a law to stop it (or I'd advocate, make it expensive but not illegal). However, since even here in Texas those cars still represent the vast minority, maybe there's no need for someone to step in.
The reality is that even here, with the highest speed limits in the US, a 180hp coupe can go fast enough to get jail time on an 85mph road, people are buying these purely for vanity reasons. A few teenage boys and overgrown teenage boys, including one guy in my neighborhood with the license plate "808HP" care but most people tend to make smarter choices.
While there may be some truth that we prefer to know the movie genre ahead of time (begetting genres themselves), the idea that we're afraid of being pleasantly surprised is asinine. We almost never are, that is the problem. Absolutely no effort is made to hook us in with a genre, and deliver us with more than we expect, at best we get a marketing checklist of included sequences. It makes a bit of sense then that audiences will at least decide which spreadsheet they wish to be party to, verify their assumption via trailer, and then commit $20+ to see the thing. $20 will get you substantially more hours of (and usually better) entertainment for the dollar than a movie theater, you have to be convinced that at least you won't hate it.
Or, we stream it on something for $5, or get it via Netflix DVD or Redbox and toss it back when the nausea subsides.
The movie industry is failing itself, blaming millions of people for not appreciating it isn't good thinking. I personally think the movie industry would do way better with a $10M budget cap and some creativity, rather than $150M explosionfests and absolutely no creativity at all.
I can see the argument for banning something not shot on film, if film is your thing. But if you're going to allow that, then banning something for being straight-to-streaming is wrong.
Not having learned the lesson of ballet and opera, some are inclined to preserve the portions of the art-form that are entirely irrelevant, at any cost, including their art.
I'm pretty sure your Apple watch isn't equipped to correct your abnormal rhythm if it was necessary
Indeed, if it was I wouldn't buy it. It's one thing to spend a few hundred bucks on a toy, it's another if that toy jolts you in the wrist to correct your heart. I am pretty sure that will tickle a bit
kind of like the light that comes on to tell you you're out of gas.
Not true at all, quite a few people I know, including both of my siblings had absolutely no idea they had heart arrythmias until it was discovered by accident. In my brother's case, he was in the hospital for other reasons, alseep, and on an EKG when it started flipping out. My sister is a nurse, I guess somehow she talked someone in to wearing a holter monitor after she heard about my brother, and sure enough same issue. It's not exactly harmless, but not warranting medical treatment at the moment. It's good to know these things.
Should you depend on your watch to tell you this? No. But if it can do this for you, that's great news.
They supposedly did a similar thing to a former employer, wherein former employer was bound by contract not to discuss the project, but there was some desire by MS to leak it. So every employee was invited to examine this project, hoping someone would leak it.
It backfired, it was so disinteresting that no one cared enough to leak it, so they had to find some other way. When the project was finally announced, absolutely no one was interested in it.
More importantly what are the natural barriers to entry that google presides over?
Last mile? No. National interconnect? No. Vertical or horizontal ownership of key resources? No. Insidious patent, copyright, license or arbitrary government backed anti-competitive government sponsored meddling? No more than everyone else.
In fact how many search engines where there before google? Remember all the add ridden, crap infested search engines of the late 90s?
Google has a good product we voluntarily want. It also has a lot of data gained from its masses of users that help it provide relevant searches, but that it has to balance against various sponsorships and clickbait crap. It has a good S:N versus competitors like Bing, which is mostly crap most of the time.
There are plenty of reasons not to fly, this is the second best one yet (being beaten by the airline for a ticket you paid good money for is #1, not sure how that will be topped).
Of course you can target poor people, you just need something they would want more than anything else. There's plenty of stuff like that, but I would bet the following couple would be the best Porn Alcohol Betting Gambling Drugs
Those things are popular with everyone who isn't suffering from some form of religious constipation. The correlation between poor and uneducated however does mean lower math skill and inability to understand what long odds really mean. A few people I grew up with who spent all their dollars at the OTB club thought long odds meant "winning multiplier", as if their chance of winning was guaranteed, they just wanted to get the most out of it.
You don't target poor people, you target the providers who are getting that $500B and want to profit more from it. If there's one thing we can rely on in the health care industry (and the US in general) it is greed.
The only app i get for OS X from the app store is XCode (and now, I guess the free numbers/pages/keynote). Otherwise I have never used it, and have no desire for it.
When a programmer, engineer, or other knowledge worker of any kind stops typing, that person is LEAST interruptible, he has hit a problem that may require Maximum Effort. Do not mess with him. Interruptions of any kind at this point are beyond awful.
Generally when we're typing or clicking, the problems are solved and we're being limited by our ability to get our idea in consumable form, short interruptions may not be as devastating. But "short" (30s) is the operative word. Maybe "Hey you want to go to lunch?" "No, in the zone" type interruptions, not "Can you explain maxwell's equations again for me? In the design review they told me not to route these two 1GHz signals together for 35 feet and I think they're just being paranoid".
What the article doesn't factor in is the time lost by the interrupter if he/she doesn't get the help/answer in a timely manner.
What I have found for this example, in the majority of cases, the interrupter has not read the documentation. If the interrupted did not WRITE documentation, then he deserves whatever he gets. But if he DID write documentation, and the interrupter clearly has not read it, then the interrupter should suffer the claymore methodology described above. If the interrupter does not have time to read the documentation, than he clearly has not planned appropriately.
Frequently the interrupter is some form of project manager or acting on behalf of that functionality and requires bi-minute status updates. This person should be launched to the moon via the most explosive possible means, always. Possibly some claymores will be waiting for him on the other end. Possibly a nuclear warhead. These are the worst offenders in my experience and the #1 reason I work from home, or in my case, a lab with restricted access that no one goes to.
Occasionally there is an oversight, in which case the interrupted again, deserves to be interrupted as it is his fault, and after answering the question should spend 10-15 minutes updating the documentation to address the oversight.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the external PCIe enclosure you may have seen is the answer to that.
TFA shows it is safer even than pot, based upon users self-reporting medical situations to authorities.
analysing particle physics data is a technically complex programming task but raises no ethical issues
Someone could use this data to devise a new super-weapon.
Everything is ethically complex if you really want to be neurotic about it, and TFA seems to be very focused on being neurotic about all the things. I mean someone seriously took a Hollywood representation of a coder seriously, when any of us who do this work for a living know that person resembles as much our job as Riggs and Murtaugh represented detective work.
Using your example exactly: the kind of coder analyzing particle physics data is probably a very disjoint personality and skill-set from someone doing javascript for Facebook. He probably has a degree in math or physics, he uses code as a tool to solve a larger problem in physics. In fact the diversity of people who code for a living is apparently not even comprehended by the author. I "code" for a living, but I am actually doing semiconductor design, I consider myself an engineer not a coder, but I write more code than many software engineers I know. I work with people who build compilers and do systems programming, these people mock the "code like a beast" crowd vigorously (and don't get them started on the "C is dead meme", everyone in these fields uses C exclusively).
What I think is lost most in TFA is that coding is actually fun, and the technical challenges are what make it fun. First, the process of decomposition is a creative task, there's often no one right solution but shades of good. Then there's the catharsis: building this elaborate machine that fulfills a complex task, spending days/weeks/months getting it how you want, and letting it rip is better than many drugs. All of this does require intense focus (many people abuse Adderall to acquire this), and it does require rigor...but then a painter who is sloppy in his work does not produce great art either.
The ethical stuff...I'm not denying that it is there sometimes, but often that decision is not ours to make.
Nobody who wants high end anything at all, will buy Huawei instead of almost any other brand.
If I want to give up my iPhone, I will probably get a Samsung. If I want to give up my macbook pro, I will probably get a dell xps. If I want to give up my Mac Pro or iMac, I will build a DIY (which in fact, I have to do anyway for VR).
There is no room in the world for Huawei, they need to go find someone who loves them, preferably somewhere in the convection zone of the Sun.
It would make sense for a government such as China to try to protect its data with its own "security measures".
China should make its own operating system to their own spec, and no one can buy it, and no one can pay their engineers who worked on it, and they can suck it.
No one should be catering to their government's needs, it should be free to fall on its face.
You have a lot of misplaced anger and I think a bad comprehension about why things are like they are, and who precisely is to blame. You blame this "government" a lot, not the people who elected the government with the intention they would enact the rules you so vigorously dislike. You aren't going to be happy anywhere on planet earth like that, because every square inch of land is claimed and governed by some organization. Focus instead of curbing the laws to make sense, and understanding that your freedom is mostly about being able to contribute to that directly and indirectly. Also consider how to make the laws accomplish their goals without unnecessary or poorly thought out restrictions which are orthogonal.
Laws about car performance have no place in the USA. I'm ok with limiting emissions, provided performance isn't touched.
If you want to be reasonable, I'm OK with this statement. However emissions is not the only problem, energy consumption is the other problem you're ignoring. And by virtue of physics, any attempt to limit energy consumption, either via progressive taxation or outright upper limits is going to impose a performance limit. If people flock to these cars in large numbers, it is likely this will need to be done.
Even professional race leagues, both NASCAR and F1 impose performance limits on the vehicles professional drivers, on closed courses can operate their vehicles. The reason is different, but the NASCAR limit at least used to be 725HP, less than what these cars are touting. NASCAR has very few drivers and few events, I don't even know how to calculate the number of how many people are on the roads every day commuting, shopping, travelling, whatever. When you start talking about bad things hundreds of millions of people do on a daily basis, then you have to look a lot more closely at the effects and how to curb them.
I agree curbing performance on street cars is not solving a problem that I am concerned with, but energy efficiency and emissions are problems I worry about.
I think the NFL should remove all pads and switch to touch football. We should have a law. I think the NBA should change their rules so that fouling isn't part of the game. There should be laws for all these things, because they teach that breaking the rules is part of the game.
You are welcome to purchase the NFL or NBA from its owners and change the rules however you like. Maybe give the defensive line pikes and let the offense run around with swords? Go nuts. But, expect that the citizens of whatever country you choose to infest to hold you financially and possibly criminally responsible for whatever happens on the field. Provided the laws exist to ensure that the NFL and NBA have to be responsible for the players, both during and after their usefulness, it seems like no extensive list of laws is required. But if someone gets paralyzed after a really awesome backflip that didn't end well, I expect the NFL is going to pay for him and his family for the rest of his life, and if they don't, you're damned right, we should get in their business. By virtue of this, reasonable businessmen are going to want to ensure their money makers are profitable, that means fewer injuries and they're free to come up with any rules they feel necessary.
The number of companies that bow to pressure to enter the Chinese and Indian markets because of volume, is precisely the same as the number of companies who have declining margins and increasing obsolescence and who get their asses kicked by companies local to (mostly) China. Yes, there are many persons in those country, but they are not rich and they are not good for high margin, premium products. At the same time, I do not know of any company who can simultaneously feed the premium product and the value product efficiently: they either sacrifice one for the other creating mediocrity, or else function as two companies in both technology and business (marketing, sales).
These markets should be avoided at all costs, once you let them in the door they will bleed you dry. If Apple wants to enter China as a value product line, they need to bifurcate and create a lower end product line with a unique brand. Wealthy Chinese will continue to prefer Apple because they know better, whereas the masses, whom Wall St. interests want to cater to, want it but will by the fake Apple brand (Fapple?) if it can deliver superior value to evil bastards like Huawei.
Under no circumstances should any concessions be made for Huawei or products like what they offer. Like Microsoft they are a company that needs to stop existing, be chopped into many pieces and buried at equidistant locations on the earth, no less than 1 mile below the surface with eternally vigilant hell hounds guarding all exits, lest they break free and condemn us all to an eternity of hellfire.
Then the question is who gets to decide which choices are "bad" -- which is generally the government -- which is chosen by the people who would generally like to make there own choices...
Bad choices are those that hurt everyone for the gain of a few, and driving more fuel efficient vehicles is necessary for the long term success of the country in terms of keeping us out of expensive wars, having us destroy our own environment to pump more oil, reducing emissions and just to keep prices down to avoid gas becoming too expensive in a country where not being able to drive may lock you out of employment. When it comes to adding more HP to a car, and the public flocking to those horses rather than fuel efficient vehicles, then it may come time to make a law to stop it (or I'd advocate, make it expensive but not illegal). However, since even here in Texas those cars still represent the vast minority, maybe there's no need for someone to step in.
The reality is that even here, with the highest speed limits in the US, a 180hp coupe can go fast enough to get jail time on an 85mph road, people are buying these purely for vanity reasons. A few teenage boys and overgrown teenage boys, including one guy in my neighborhood with the license plate "808HP" care but most people tend to make smarter choices.
While there may be some truth that we prefer to know the movie genre ahead of time (begetting genres themselves), the idea that we're afraid of being pleasantly surprised is asinine. We almost never are, that is the problem. Absolutely no effort is made to hook us in with a genre, and deliver us with more than we expect, at best we get a marketing checklist of included sequences. It makes a bit of sense then that audiences will at least decide which spreadsheet they wish to be party to, verify their assumption via trailer, and then commit $20+ to see the thing. $20 will get you substantially more hours of (and usually better) entertainment for the dollar than a movie theater, you have to be convinced that at least you won't hate it.
Or, we stream it on something for $5, or get it via Netflix DVD or Redbox and toss it back when the nausea subsides.
The movie industry is failing itself, blaming millions of people for not appreciating it isn't good thinking. I personally think the movie industry would do way better with a $10M budget cap and some creativity, rather than $150M explosionfests and absolutely no creativity at all.
How many of those graduates go on to college? Are you talking about the same group of people?
I'm not even sure this is the topic, it seems like the topic is the lack of formality and arbitrary forms of respect.
Unless you have a production environment with a software product that breaks with Windows update turned on
And this is the scenario that happens more often than a patch was ahead of the exploit. It still makes the most sense to keep update OFF.
My HOA
First problem.
hasn't allowed Comcast to replace wiring
This should be illegal.
I can see the argument for banning something not shot on film, if film is your thing. But if you're going to allow that, then banning something for being straight-to-streaming is wrong.
Not having learned the lesson of ballet and opera, some are inclined to preserve the portions of the art-form that are entirely irrelevant, at any cost, including their art.
"sue the hand"
You can try, but the pimp hand is strong.
I'm pretty sure your Apple watch isn't equipped to correct your abnormal rhythm if it was necessary
Indeed, if it was I wouldn't buy it. It's one thing to spend a few hundred bucks on a toy, it's another if that toy jolts you in the wrist to correct your heart. I am pretty sure that will tickle a bit
kind of like the light that comes on to tell you you're out of gas.
Not true at all, quite a few people I know, including both of my siblings had absolutely no idea they had heart arrythmias until it was discovered by accident. In my brother's case, he was in the hospital for other reasons, alseep, and on an EKG when it started flipping out. My sister is a nurse, I guess somehow she talked someone in to wearing a holter monitor after she heard about my brother, and sure enough same issue. It's not exactly harmless, but not warranting medical treatment at the moment. It's good to know these things.
Should you depend on your watch to tell you this? No. But if it can do this for you, that's great news.
They supposedly did a similar thing to a former employer, wherein former employer was bound by contract not to discuss the project, but there was some desire by MS to leak it. So every employee was invited to examine this project, hoping someone would leak it.
It backfired, it was so disinteresting that no one cared enough to leak it, so they had to find some other way. When the project was finally announced, absolutely no one was interested in it.
More importantly what are the natural barriers to entry that google presides over?
Last mile? No.
National interconnect? No.
Vertical or horizontal ownership of key resources? No.
Insidious patent, copyright, license or arbitrary government backed anti-competitive government sponsored meddling? No more than everyone else.
In fact how many search engines where there before google? Remember all the add ridden, crap infested search engines of the late 90s?
Google has a good product we voluntarily want. It also has a lot of data gained from its masses of users that help it provide relevant searches, but that it has to balance against various sponsorships and clickbait crap. It has a good S:N versus competitors like Bing, which is mostly crap most of the time.
There are plenty of reasons not to fly, this is the second best one yet (being beaten by the airline for a ticket you paid good money for is #1, not sure how that will be topped).
Of course you can target poor people, you just need something they would want more than anything else.
There's plenty of stuff like that, but I would bet the following couple would be the best
Porn
Alcohol
Betting
Gambling
Drugs
Those things are popular with everyone who isn't suffering from some form of religious constipation. The correlation between poor and uneducated however does mean lower math skill and inability to understand what long odds really mean. A few people I grew up with who spent all their dollars at the OTB club thought long odds meant "winning multiplier", as if their chance of winning was guaranteed, they just wanted to get the most out of it.
You don't target poor people, you target the providers who are getting that $500B and want to profit more from it. If there's one thing we can rely on in the health care industry (and the US in general) it is greed.
it was what people were used to
In that we got used to another distribution.
Apple essentially already does this.
The only app i get for OS X from the app store is XCode (and now, I guess the free numbers/pages/keynote). Otherwise I have never used it, and have no desire for it.
No if he said Hillary was Obama's cock holster I'd say I don't think she's touched anyone's cock in a few decades.
when tapping slows or stops
When a programmer, engineer, or other knowledge worker of any kind stops typing, that person is LEAST interruptible, he has hit a problem that may require Maximum Effort. Do not mess with him. Interruptions of any kind at this point are beyond awful.
Generally when we're typing or clicking, the problems are solved and we're being limited by our ability to get our idea in consumable form, short interruptions may not be as devastating. But "short" (30s) is the operative word. Maybe "Hey you want to go to lunch?" "No, in the zone" type interruptions, not "Can you explain maxwell's equations again for me? In the design review they told me not to route these two 1GHz signals together for 35 feet and I think they're just being paranoid".
What the article doesn't factor in is the time lost by the interrupter if he/she doesn't get the help/answer in a timely manner.
What I have found for this example, in the majority of cases, the interrupter has not read the documentation. If the interrupted did not WRITE documentation, then he deserves whatever he gets. But if he DID write documentation, and the interrupter clearly has not read it, then the interrupter should suffer the claymore methodology described above. If the interrupter does not have time to read the documentation, than he clearly has not planned appropriately.
Frequently the interrupter is some form of project manager or acting on behalf of that functionality and requires bi-minute status updates. This person should be launched to the moon via the most explosive possible means, always. Possibly some claymores will be waiting for him on the other end. Possibly a nuclear warhead. These are the worst offenders in my experience and the #1 reason I work from home, or in my case, a lab with restricted access that no one goes to.
Occasionally there is an oversight, in which case the interrupted again, deserves to be interrupted as it is his fault, and after answering the question should spend 10-15 minutes updating the documentation to address the oversight.