Opera (offering Opera Turbo), Nokia (http://www.developer.nokia.com/Develop/Series_40/Nokia_Browser_for_Series_40/) etc. are not the network providers, so your argument is moot. They neither save any bandwidth on their side by offering the proxy, quite the opposite, not do they just cache the traffic.
Several mobile phone companies and some browsers offer special proxies nowadays to speed up browser experience on mobile phone and to reduce data usage for customers by serving prerendered or otherwise optimized/reduced pages. This might severely reduce Googles ability to collect user data from these users on the visited web pages (unless the user is logged in to google+ or alike with his browser, which might be unlikely given that for social networks there are usually separate apps).
Is this now a step to reduce the need for these proxies in order to protect their own business?
If this is a honeypot, lets create some tinyurl links and post them on e.g. Foxnews website or something to give them some bees:-) (Disclaimer: This was a joke, not a real encouragement to do any dodgy stuff. If you can't tell the difference better stay out of the internet.)
I disagree. A bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing at times, because little knowledge often comes with a lot of confidence. Better be ignorant and know it, thus avoiding a fight whenever possible, than being overconfident and receiving a beating. It's a bit related to the old joke between electronic engineers and software engineers. Says the electronic engineer: "What's the most dangerous thing in a lab? A software engineer reaching for the soldering iron!". Says the software engineer: "What's the most dangerous thing in the office? An electronic engineer discovering the C compiler!"
Seriously: I saw some source code written by some highly qualified electronic engineers, and it was awful. They just have a different mindset. In electronic engineering for mass market products, cost-efficiency and real-live performance is probably *much* more valuable than re-usability and maintainability, since every cent saved on one device repays million-fold. In Programming readability / maintainability is among the highest priorities, and the runtime complexity of algorithms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation) is often way more important than current real live performance, because for later product iterations the amount of data might grow exponential, leading to extremely different "real live" performance.
I can only imagine what pain the ee's suffer when they have to watch an se with a soldering iron...
Depends how Google plays this. If the search result focus on a position somewhere between the global average and the current position of the searcher, the opposite development might be possible as well (picking up extremists and slowly leading them to global average). Of course they could also just make up their mind what they want people to believe and lead them to that point, or they might consider to sell the target point to the highest bidder.
Well, it worked for some time, but lately even when looking for some completely innocent words, like e.g. "frog" I tend to get only kinky results. (Don't ask, you don't want to see...) I could not remotely guess how this should in any way reflect my personal interest. (And I did delete my browser history in forehand, also I by no means did not look at any kinky stuff, off course.)
This depends if the originator of the research wants to sell you games/riddles to exercise you brain, sports gear, some vitamins or if he wants to do the thinking for you as a paid service. In the latter case all hope is lost, and neither vitamins nor training will help you.
It's where you end up once you start down that route.
Yes, I already feel quite Korean here in Germany...
If I could get a 'living income' for just sitting around the house doing nothing, why would I do anything else?
Because it's no fun to have no money to travel, no money to buy a better TV, better Computer, a nicer car etc.? Because it sucks living at a minimum when your neighbor earns bigger? Of course, if you are currently limiting your work to the minimum amount required to have enough to bite, essential medicines, and a roof above your head, you might have a point. But than you are way lazier than average people...
Euhm, in case you haven't noticed : we don't have enough people to do what needs to be done.
So, why are there so many unemployed ín so many countries? I assume, because the people needed are the *qualified* people? And to get them it would be great to spare them wasting their time 40hours a week to earn their university education and instead let them focus on the education, I'd say.
And, as I've studied AI, might I add this little datapoint. It is trivial to prove that every learning algorithm in existence, given the circumstances you describe (ie. neither survival nor any kind of strong impulse coupled to performance) dies. It dies in the sense that it looses all abilities it has, until it can't do anything at all anymore.
And what happens with the learning algorithm, when it's not executed because the CPU is busy executing "tunenAndServeBurger" with 100% CPU time? No ones talking about removing the incentive. It might be reduced a bit, but I'd assume that most students are not studying for a future to earn just enough to live somehow, but to get rich and respected. This incentive will not change. On the other hand intelligent people are risk aware and susceptible to the Dunning Kruger effect, resulting in lots of potential engineers shying away from starting an education which might fail and ruin their whole existence.
For the rest of your post: AI is currently far, far away from resembling human learning. (You should know if you studied it.) Also there are non-monetary incentives for humans, like recognition and respect from peers, moral standards, etc. In total I'd say, get out of your lab/office/workplace and in touch with people once in a while.
No, I don't thinks so. Majority of people want's to have at least a tiny bit more than their neighbors, and with a just enough unconditional base income (Yes, it's not supposed to be comfortable but "just enough") for everyone, there is still a high incentive to earn a bit more. This would decrease the wages the companies have to pay, since people only have to earn for their luxury instead of everything they need. And it might even create new sustainable business models to employ people who are currently unemployable.
The current problem is that (at least in Germany) as soon as you earn a bit on top, this bit is deducted from social welfare almost immediately, and with a low income you might not be eligible to several other benefits, so your net income might end up below the social welfare level. I could imagine that the problem with Social Security Disability would be similar?
I'd say, rather 50%. Nowadays technology is so complex you can't start by being intelligent and thinking structured, you have to get a head start by learning also the existing inventions. And also, those too lazy / incapable to do the learning from books will not succeed because of their laziness. I work in Germany and have some Russian colleagues and interviewed some applicants, and most Russians I met are eager and capable to learn. For them, learning is a very valid way to become something, while some people from western culture (richer European countries as well as USA) are too arrogant to see the need to learn, because they feel so advanced already and think live owes them a decent live for being born so advanced.
Of course this is only a statistical observation. Obviously there are some very dumb/lazy Russians and some very clever/diligent Americans/Europeans as well.
Performing above optimum is per definition not possible. So asking for this proves the Management is acting below optimum, measured by their ability to apply basic logic.
For such a small group I think it might be a better solution to just look at the tickets, filter for those with especially high response time, for those which where closed and reopened frequently, and for those which took longest for the first reply. Based on your gut feeling what management really wants (Do they look for excuses to fire people? Do they really want to improve the system?) you would either come up with a metric that strengthens your position most or with a metric which shows the bottleneck of your service or with a list of the worst cases [not by metric, but by common sense combining the different aspects] and try to find a common pattern / root cause to improve on.
No, it's not integrated in People hub, which is more or less the point of the app: People hub is designed to connect each and everything as a design goal. The phonebook is made to avoid this. There is no way I could accidentally sync this contact to another website. And of course I can make calls from this application. One disadvantage is that the name is not displayed, only the phone number.
I agree that many people don't care about this, also I feel that the European mindset is on average a bit more critical regarding privacy. I think there might be another risk, but I would prefer not to write it here to avoid giving people ideas. (I also have some stakes in Windows Phone somehow...) I will add you as friend in slashdot; I never used this feature until now, but I guess that way I could send "private" messages without posting an email address here.
Cool idea, I will look into it if I find time. However, as a first step I installed the "My Contacts Local" app I found, and it is a sufficient solution for my problem. Nevertheless, it would be really great if Peoples Hub on the phone could simply support a checkbox for all contacts where I could disable synchronization. This would imo be the easiest and most convenient solution for the average user.
Just found a really good advice: The app "My Contacts Local". Some minor drawbacks, but the basic idea is great. I need to play around with this app a bit before commenting on it any further.
Then maybe I can set up a local server... I might try this tomorrow. I should be able to do this without exposing it to the Internet, and still be able to access it via WLAN in the intranet. Just need to find the right kind of server... afaik IMAP and POP3 don't handle contact data, Exchange server is out of question (too expensive just for hobby)
Anyway, thanks for your help. I need to sleep now, it's 1:30am in my time zone:-)
I don't think the phone has a concept of local contacts, to be honest, I think they have to be a mirror of a remote service: be it Live, or Exchange, or Gmail etc...
No, not quite. When I took the phone first into use I didn't have any account on it. Still I was able to add contacts. But maybe it is implemented like assuming all local contacts belong to an imaginary WL account as long as no real WL account is there... Do you see your Exchange contacts in your people hub on the phone?
Slashdot Mirror
Inefficient list of three letter agencies, you probably forgot some.
char t[5] ; memcpy( t, "AAA\n", 5);
do { do { do {
printf( t );
#define W(a) } while (t[a]++ 'Z'); t[a]='A';
W(0) W(1) W(2)
Opera (offering Opera Turbo), Nokia (http://www.developer.nokia.com/Develop/Series_40/Nokia_Browser_for_Series_40/) etc. are not the network providers, so your argument is moot. They neither save any bandwidth on their side by offering the proxy, quite the opposite, not do they just cache the traffic.
Several mobile phone companies and some browsers offer special proxies nowadays to speed up browser experience on mobile phone and to reduce data usage for customers by serving prerendered or otherwise optimized/reduced pages. This might severely reduce Googles ability to collect user data from these users on the visited web pages (unless the user is logged in to google+ or alike with his browser, which might be unlikely given that for social networks there are usually separate apps).
Is this now a step to reduce the need for these proxies in order to protect their own business?
Can I rightfully call them "lunatic"?
But they might check afterwards and notice the egg is not raw (anymore). Doesn't this violate the rules?
I'd love to see an airplane competition for the longest flight...
If this is a honeypot, lets create some tinyurl links and post them on e.g. Foxnews website or something to give them some bees :-)
(Disclaimer: This was a joke, not a real encouragement to do any dodgy stuff. If you can't tell the difference better stay out of the internet.)
not complaining either, but cpu speed and storage size usually also grow exponentially ;-)
(Moors Law)
I disagree. A bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing at times, because little knowledge often comes with a lot of confidence. Better be ignorant and know it, thus avoiding a fight whenever possible, than being overconfident and receiving a beating.
It's a bit related to the old joke between electronic engineers and software engineers. Says the electronic engineer: "What's the most dangerous thing in a lab? A software engineer reaching for the soldering iron!". Says the software engineer: "What's the most dangerous thing in the office? An electronic engineer discovering the C compiler!"
Seriously: I saw some source code written by some highly qualified electronic engineers, and it was awful. They just have a different mindset. In electronic engineering for mass market products, cost-efficiency and real-live performance is probably *much* more valuable than re-usability and maintainability, since every cent saved on one device repays million-fold. In Programming readability / maintainability is among the highest priorities, and the runtime complexity of algorithms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation) is often way more important than current real live performance, because for later product iterations the amount of data might grow exponential, leading to extremely different "real live" performance.
I can only imagine what pain the ee's suffer when they have to watch an se with a soldering iron...
Depends how Google plays this. If the search result focus on a position somewhere between the global average and the current position of the searcher, the opposite development might be possible as well (picking up extremists and slowly leading them to global average). Of course they could also just make up their mind what they want people to believe and lead them to that point, or they might consider to sell the target point to the highest bidder.
Well, it worked for some time, but lately even when looking for some completely innocent words, like e.g. "frog" I tend to get only kinky results. (Don't ask, you don't want to see...) I could not remotely guess how this should in any way reflect my personal interest. (And I did delete my browser history in forehand, also I by no means did not look at any kinky stuff, off course.)
Maybe this explains the misconception of masturbation leading to brain damage ;-)
This depends if the originator of the research wants to sell you games/riddles to exercise you brain, sports gear, some vitamins or if he wants to do the thinking for you as a paid service. In the latter case all hope is lost, and neither vitamins nor training will help you.
Don't know, can't remember anymore...
And old was the youngest boss of him? I guess, 45?
It's where you end up once you start down that route.
Yes, I already feel quite Korean here in Germany...
If I could get a 'living income' for just sitting around the house doing nothing, why would I do anything else?
Because it's no fun to have no money to travel, no money to buy a better TV, better Computer, a nicer car etc.? Because it sucks living at a minimum when your neighbor earns bigger? Of course, if you are currently limiting your work to the minimum amount required to have enough to bite, essential medicines, and a roof above your head, you might have a point. But than you are way lazier than average people...
Euhm, in case you haven't noticed : we don't have enough people to do what needs to be done.
So, why are there so many unemployed ín so many countries? I assume, because the people needed are the *qualified* people? And to get them it would be great to spare them wasting their time 40hours a week to earn their university education and instead let them focus on the education, I'd say.
And, as I've studied AI, might I add this little datapoint. It is trivial to prove that every learning algorithm in existence, given the circumstances you describe (ie. neither survival nor any kind of strong impulse coupled to performance) dies. It dies in the sense that it looses all abilities it has, until it can't do anything at all anymore.
And what happens with the learning algorithm, when it's not executed because the CPU is busy executing "tunenAndServeBurger" with 100% CPU time? No ones talking about removing the incentive. It might be reduced a bit, but I'd assume that most students are not studying for a future to earn just enough to live somehow, but to get rich and respected. This incentive will not change. On the other hand intelligent people are risk aware and susceptible to the Dunning Kruger effect, resulting in lots of potential engineers shying away from starting an education which might fail and ruin their whole existence.
For the rest of your post: AI is currently far, far away from resembling human learning. (You should know if you studied it.) Also there are non-monetary incentives for humans, like recognition and respect from peers, moral standards, etc. In total I'd say, get out of your lab/office/workplace and in touch with people once in a while.
No, I don't thinks so. Majority of people want's to have at least a tiny bit more than their neighbors, and with a just enough unconditional base income (Yes, it's not supposed to be comfortable but "just enough") for everyone, there is still a high incentive to earn a bit more. This would decrease the wages the companies have to pay, since people only have to earn for their luxury instead of everything they need. And it might even create new sustainable business models to employ people who are currently unemployable.
The current problem is that (at least in Germany) as soon as you earn a bit on top, this bit is deducted from social welfare almost immediately, and with a low income you might not be eligible to several other benefits, so your net income might end up below the social welfare level. I could imagine that the problem with Social Security Disability would be similar?
I'd say, rather 50%. Nowadays technology is so complex you can't start by being intelligent and thinking structured, you have to get a head start by learning also the existing inventions. And also, those too lazy / incapable to do the learning from books will not succeed because of their laziness.
I work in Germany and have some Russian colleagues and interviewed some applicants, and most Russians I met are eager and capable to learn. For them, learning is a very valid way to become something, while some people from western culture (richer European countries as well as USA) are too arrogant to see the need to learn, because they feel so advanced already and think live owes them a decent live for being born so advanced.
Of course this is only a statistical observation. Obviously there are some very dumb/lazy Russians and some very clever/diligent Americans/Europeans as well.
Talking about leading edge computing...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOP500#November_2011
Top ten are all running Linux...
Performing above optimum is per definition not possible. So asking for this proves the Management is acting below optimum, measured by their ability to apply basic logic.
For such a small group I think it might be a better solution to just look at the tickets, filter for those with especially high response time, for those which where closed and reopened frequently, and for those which took longest for the first reply. Based on your gut feeling what management really wants (Do they look for excuses to fire people? Do they really want to improve the system?) you would either come up with a metric that strengthens your position most or with a metric which shows the bottleneck of your service or with a list of the worst cases [not by metric, but by common sense combining the different aspects] and try to find a common pattern / root cause to improve on.
No, it's not integrated in People hub, which is more or less the point of the app: People hub is designed to connect each and everything as a design goal. The phonebook is made to avoid this. There is no way I could accidentally sync this contact to another website. And of course I can make calls from this application. One disadvantage is that the name is not displayed, only the phone number.
I agree that many people don't care about this, also I feel that the European mindset is on average a bit more critical regarding privacy. I think there might be another risk, but I would prefer not to write it here to avoid giving people ideas. (I also have some stakes in Windows Phone somehow...) I will add you as friend in slashdot; I never used this feature until now, but I guess that way I could send "private" messages without posting an email address here.
Cool idea, I will look into it if I find time. However, as a first step I installed the "My Contacts Local" app I found, and it is a sufficient solution for my problem. Nevertheless, it would be really great if Peoples Hub on the phone could simply support a checkbox for all contacts where I could disable synchronization. This would imo be the easiest and most convenient solution for the average user.
Just found a really good advice: The app "My Contacts Local". Some minor drawbacks, but the basic idea is great. I need to play around with this app a bit before commenting on it any further.
Then maybe I can set up a local server... I might try this tomorrow. I should be able to do this without exposing it to the Internet, and still be able to access it via WLAN in the intranet. Just need to find the right kind of server... afaik IMAP and POP3 don't handle contact data, Exchange server is out of question (too expensive just for hobby)
Anyway, thanks for your help. I need to sleep now, it's 1:30am in my time zone :-)
I don't think the phone has a concept of local contacts, to be honest, I think they have to be a mirror of a remote service: be it Live, or Exchange, or Gmail etc...
No, not quite. When I took the phone first into use I didn't have any account on it. Still I was able to add contacts. But maybe it is implemented like assuming all local contacts belong to an imaginary WL account as long as no real WL account is there...
Do you see your Exchange contacts in your people hub on the phone?