Without bothering to RTFM, does this mean that if they have two (or more) WAPs and the device was connected to each that they could get an accurate location? As it is, it seems that by using in-flight times, they can only determine distance from the WAP which isn't so much a location but a locus of them.
The performance would be better than that of a human regardless.
Until it's not. Perhaps the best solution is to use both. That is, automate but have a human operator as backup. That way when the automation goes off the rails (either figuratively or literally), there's a human there saying "that's not quite right" and can resume the reins. Automation should allow for a higher system-to-human ratio, so it's not a complete loss.
In this case, the "gels" were employing a heuristic to know when to do something (in this case, turn on the air ventilation system). It was assumed that it was something meaningful to the action (i.e. something to do with the recipients of the ventilation), but it was something arbitrary (i.e. the way the clock looked). So, unless you have insight into what the heuristic is, you won't know when it's going to have the expected behavior and when it isn't. Even if it seemingly has the expected behavior for a long time.
'The communication becomes so deep that you don't even use words anymore,' says Facebook programmer, cosignatory to the Agile Manifesto, and inventor of Extreme Programming Kent Beck.
Take a look at turning on sticky keys for the duration of your recovery. I'm assuming that you're on Windows, but Linux for sure and Mac probably has the same feature (just maybe called something different). Also, take the opportunity to think more and type less. Maybe you'll achieve code enlightenment, which is nice. Good luck on the recovery and do whatever your orthopedist says.
My point is that in this case, the software vendor in question is marketing to clients who would have a hard time justifying the licensing cost of even SQL Server Standard Edition. So, stepping into the vendor's shoes, I ask what are my clients likely to pay for and "Express" is the answer. Plus, it's likely able to keep up with the demands of any restaurant out there given even moderately decent hardware.
If I were writing a POS system for anybody smaller than Hardees/Carl's Jr, I'd be using SQL Express. There aren't a lot of sweet options for HA there. At the end of the day, what does your vendor suggest/support? I'd go with that.
Oh... I see what you did there. You used a "$" instead of the "S" in Microsoft's commonly used abbreviation. Because they're a company that tries to make money. Clever.
I think the point that s/he was trying to make is that most people assume that college athletics makes their money (or at least the lion's share) from ticket sales when the reality is that they make their money by and large from donations with ticket sales comprising a small portion of revenue.
That said, I think colleges should stop viewing their athletic programs as an end unto themselves and as a means to an end, namely to generate revenue for the college at large. After all colleges are still ostensibly academic institutions.
No, the Jordan Effect is the result of him dying w/o finishing the series. Unless we're talking about two different things. But what I'm talking about is not starting a series until it's finished for fear that it might remain unfinished.
I've been in this situation before. When it happens and there's one PM in charge of all the projects I'm working on, I sit down with them and say "There are n things on my list. Rank them 1 to n." If they say everything is a 1, I tell them that they had their chance and the order is now up to me and arbitrary. If it's multiple PMs, I set up a meeting with them to expose the problem. It usually resolves itself there, but if it doesn't, see the one PM strategy.
I haven't started the "Song of Ice and Fire" series yet as a result of this and the Jordan Effect (as coined by grandparent poster). Which is too bad because I hear it's phenomenal.
We are more conservative in our package merge with Debian, auto-synching with Debian testing, instead of Debian unstable.
We start stabilizing the release early by significantly limiting the number of new features. We will choose which features we package into the LTS release, versus which ones we leave out and allow for users to optionally download and use from a separate archive.
Avoid structural changes as far as possible, such as changing the default set of applications, lots of library transitions, or system layer changes (example: introducing KMS or hal DeviceKit would not have been appropriate changes in a LTS).
What'd be interesting to me is if you administered this test to current athletes and found the ones who the test wouldn't have predicted would be good. I can only think of a few sports where only one thing is the determinant for success. Those sports are typically ones in which you're not dealing with other people directly. So, track and field, and weightlifting. In every other sport that I can imagine, there's an element of having to react to another human being's actions. And sometimes, if you're really good at that and making appropriate decisions based on it, you can beat the guy with better size/speed/power.
So, when I finally bit the bullet and joined FB this year, I had a bunch of pending friend requests that I'd previously ignored waiting for me. How else would this have been accomplished if not for the so-called shadow profile? It struck me as a no-brainer at the time.
Here's what I've done historically. Take the new job but give your employer the option to contact you for issues that they can't figure out. Determine an hourly rate and be a consultant. Put time expectations on it (i.e. "I'll spend no more than 3 hours on an average week for the next 3 months"). Tell the new employer about your situation (in case there are conflict of interest issues). By doing this, you're giving your current employer a way to still have access to any unique knowledge that you have while still doing what's right for you. You get a reputation for being a good guy with the current employer (and likely the new since you're showing the behavior that you'll exhibit when you leave them) and you get the better job. Win-win.
Slashdot Mirror
Bezos can afford to take the astronomically small risk.
I see what you did there.
Without bothering to RTFM, does this mean that if they have two (or more) WAPs and the device was connected to each that they could get an accurate location? As it is, it seems that by using in-flight times, they can only determine distance from the WAP which isn't so much a location but a locus of them.
Not to mention he probably hose d up the lives of any man interested in dating those 9 women. C'mon, don't ruin it for the next guy.
Why? Because a woman who's had an abortion is somehow damaged goods?
. If you'd write your data inside an Excel sheet, use a table. Otherwise, don't.
Checked and raised
The performance would be better than that of a human regardless.
Until it's not. Perhaps the best solution is to use both. That is, automate but have a human operator as backup. That way when the automation goes off the rails (either figuratively or literally), there's a human there saying "that's not quite right" and can resume the reins. Automation should allow for a higher system-to-human ratio, so it's not a complete loss.
In this case, the "gels" were employing a heuristic to know when to do something (in this case, turn on the air ventilation system). It was assumed that it was something meaningful to the action (i.e. something to do with the recipients of the ventilation), but it was something arbitrary (i.e. the way the clock looked). So, unless you have insight into what the heuristic is, you won't know when it's going to have the expected behavior and when it isn't. Even if it seemingly has the expected behavior for a long time.
http://www.despair.com/incompetence.html
Which is not to say that you're not skilled. But management trying to solve the problem of falling behind by saying "work more hours" is futile.
Fixed that for you
Take a look at turning on sticky keys for the duration of your recovery. I'm assuming that you're on Windows, but Linux for sure and Mac probably has the same feature (just maybe called something different). Also, take the opportunity to think more and type less. Maybe you'll achieve code enlightenment, which is nice. Good luck on the recovery and do whatever your orthopedist says.
Given that they're giving it away to anyone who has pre-ordered, I'd say yes unless they really want to give out a crap ton of them.
My point is that in this case, the software vendor in question is marketing to clients who would have a hard time justifying the licensing cost of even SQL Server Standard Edition. So, stepping into the vendor's shoes, I ask what are my clients likely to pay for and "Express" is the answer. Plus, it's likely able to keep up with the demands of any restaurant out there given even moderately decent hardware.
If I were writing a POS system for anybody smaller than Hardees/Carl's Jr, I'd be using SQL Express. There aren't a lot of sweet options for HA there. At the end of the day, what does your vendor suggest/support? I'd go with that.
Oh... I see what you did there. You used a "$" instead of the "S" in Microsoft's commonly used abbreviation. Because they're a company that tries to make money. Clever.
I think the point that s/he was trying to make is that most people assume that college athletics makes their money (or at least the lion's share) from ticket sales when the reality is that they make their money by and large from donations with ticket sales comprising a small portion of revenue. That said, I think colleges should stop viewing their athletic programs as an end unto themselves and as a means to an end, namely to generate revenue for the college at large. After all colleges are still ostensibly academic institutions.
It might just take nothing more then that first hole in the dyke.
They prefer to be called "lesbians" now, you insensitive clod!
No, the Jordan Effect is the result of him dying w/o finishing the series. Unless we're talking about two different things. But what I'm talking about is not starting a series until it's finished for fear that it might remain unfinished.
I've been in this situation before. When it happens and there's one PM in charge of all the projects I'm working on, I sit down with them and say "There are n things on my list. Rank them 1 to n." If they say everything is a 1, I tell them that they had their chance and the order is now up to me and arbitrary. If it's multiple PMs, I set up a meeting with them to expose the problem. It usually resolves itself there, but if it doesn't, see the one PM strategy.
I haven't started the "Song of Ice and Fire" series yet as a result of this and the Jordan Effect (as coined by grandparent poster). Which is too bad because I hear it's phenomenal.
It obviously "Player Character".
Emphasis mine
Mod parent up. LTS is for software that is already stable. It's not for proof of concept stuff or first releases. This seems like both to me.
What'd be interesting to me is if you administered this test to current athletes and found the ones who the test wouldn't have predicted would be good. I can only think of a few sports where only one thing is the determinant for success. Those sports are typically ones in which you're not dealing with other people directly. So, track and field, and weightlifting. In every other sport that I can imagine, there's an element of having to react to another human being's actions. And sometimes, if you're really good at that and making appropriate decisions based on it, you can beat the guy with better size/speed/power.
So, when I finally bit the bullet and joined FB this year, I had a bunch of pending friend requests that I'd previously ignored waiting for me. How else would this have been accomplished if not for the so-called shadow profile? It struck me as a no-brainer at the time.
Here's what I've done historically. Take the new job but give your employer the option to contact you for issues that they can't figure out. Determine an hourly rate and be a consultant. Put time expectations on it (i.e. "I'll spend no more than 3 hours on an average week for the next 3 months"). Tell the new employer about your situation (in case there are conflict of interest issues). By doing this, you're giving your current employer a way to still have access to any unique knowledge that you have while still doing what's right for you. You get a reputation for being a good guy with the current employer (and likely the new since you're showing the behavior that you'll exhibit when you leave them) and you get the better job. Win-win.
I was thinking more of the scene from "Meet the Parents" where Greg explains how he milks a cat.