> I'm sure it varies state by state (and province by province)...
Here in Germany our apartment building has solar/electric panels on the roof and it works out better financially to sell *all* the power to the electric company and then buy it back under and Eco-tariff !!
> Or, more simply, query something you know doesn't exist (like asdfdsafdsafhdsds.com)
1) Quickly registered non-existing domain mentioned on Slashdot and put up an ad-serving site. 2) Wait for bored Slashdotters to try the link. 3) Profit.
> Under these conditions terrain-following radar is a necessity, since a human pilot cannot react quickly enough to changing terrain heights, and is much more likely to cause a crash than an automated system in the same circumstances.
Ditto, IIRC, for the EuroFighter. To get maneuverability it is inherently unstable (aerodynamically), and a human pilot can not react fast enough to control it. Hence no computer override.
> Meanwhile it's surprising how often my mates who have done IT or computer science ask me for help on something because they just don't know how to THINK.
Apples and Oranges: your mates are trained to design and write software etc, not debug hardware and OS config problems.
> The difference is that I can sit down and simply enter near algorithms of matrix math into Fortran, and the optimizer will go to town and give me near perfect code,
Ahhh: a breath of fresh air. As a programmer this is to me exactly how it should work. Not my language is better than your language but the programmer can get on with describing the solution, and leave the compiler to do the boring work !!
> Even if travelling by car does not cause an accident, it does make the consequences worse. Maybe we should ban cars and cycle or walk everywhere?
As a cyclist, then yes: I would prefer to ban cars (except for those who really need them) BUT I am happy to compromise by *sharing* the *public* roads with motorists. But it should be on the basis of equal *sharing* not that the biggest (cars) bullying the weaker (cyclists, pedestrians). Vulnerable road users do need protection, and the police seem to have little time for sorting out road offenders, so a techno-fix is an option.
And, yes, I would prefer to get the bad drivers rather that the fast drivers off the road. But how ?
(I have 20+ years proffesional programming experience, a good chunk of it in C/C++, and in recent years have spent a lot of time debugging other peoples code, especially ported, re-ported and generally hacked around code !)
IMHO a lot of the posts here are missing the point when they say, "these functions are safe, you just need to check the size before hand" etc. The fact is, in the Real World, not everyone is an ace-programmer, deadlines loom, mistakes get made. Problems do not appear in testing, but can further down the line. IMHO a language simply should *not allow* the programmer to do crazy things. Potential buffer overflows, de-referencing null pointers etc should not get past the *compiler*.
To be honest I do not have a prefered language to suggest, but I do not think that tweaking C is the answer, but better, high level, languages are needed.
Will it really help ? All it would take is a small compensation on the drivers behalf to negate any advantage ("ohh: I have the latest pedestrian airbags; I can drive a little faster in crowded streets.")
Re:I really wish BSD would take off.
on
FreeBSD 7.2 Released
·
· Score: 3, Funny
> I really feel for the BSD guys. Just hope they can keep users.
There are quite a few changes in there, so I can imagine that they will both be happy.
I am not a doctor, but are not comparisons with the 1918 flu outbreak irrelevant: it passed human to human, whereas this pig flu is only passed pig to human.
Solution: leave the pigs alone (as a vegy I am trying very hard to not say "I told you so" !!)
Slashdot Mirror
> if they were real hackers
And if they were real criminals, they would have trousered $64.8 billion.
> I'm sure it varies state by state (and province by province)...
Here in Germany our apartment building has solar/electric panels on the roof and it works out better financially to sell *all* the power to the electric company and then buy it back under and Eco-tariff !!
Do not worry left-side-of-the-pond-ers. Europe will step in a 'save your asses' :-)
Plan to build a < insert any large, hi-tech project > is being threatened by rising costs, delays and technical challenges.
> I could see someone realizing that they have too much cash to get through customs buying gold.
I could imagine some countries where it may be needed to get *through* customs :-)
> Or, more simply, query something you know doesn't exist (like asdfdsafdsafhdsds.com)
1) Quickly registered non-existing domain mentioned on Slashdot and put up an ad-serving site.
2) Wait for bored Slashdotters to try the link.
3) Profit.
Thanks Slashdot :-)
> Under these conditions terrain-following radar is a necessity, since a human pilot cannot react quickly enough to changing terrain heights, and is much more likely to cause a crash than an automated system in the same circumstances.
Ditto, IIRC, for the EuroFighter. To get maneuverability it is inherently unstable (aerodynamically), and a human pilot can not react fast enough to control it. Hence no computer override.
> Children 50 years ago would die if they saw how easy kids have it today.
And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't believe you.
(Slurps glass of Château de Chasselas)
> I work for an embedded systems manufacturer that switched to Windows Embedded...
Does your employer by any chance make aircraft control systems for Airbus ?
> Meanwhile it's surprising how often my mates who have done IT or computer science ask me for help on something because they just don't know how to THINK.
Apples and Oranges: your mates are trained to design and write software etc, not debug hardware and OS config problems.
> There are no existing laws or regulations that allow UAVs to fly in US airspace.
IANAL but I though the basic principle of law was that everything is allowed except that which is specifically *not* allowed by some law.
> The difference is that I can sit down and simply enter near algorithms of matrix math into Fortran, and the optimizer will go to town and give me near perfect code,
Ahhh: a breath of fresh air. As a programmer this is to me exactly how it should work. Not my language is better than your language but the programmer can get on with describing the solution, and leave the compiler to do the boring work !!
Simpler version (!!); start with 1m2 piece of paper with an aspect ratio of sqrt(2):1 ...
This is A0. Cut in half for A1, half again for A2
> Even if travelling by car does not cause an accident, it does make the consequences worse. Maybe we should ban cars and cycle or walk everywhere?
As a cyclist, then yes: I would prefer to ban cars (except for those who really need them) BUT I am happy to compromise by *sharing* the *public* roads with motorists. But it should be on the basis of equal *sharing* not that the biggest (cars) bullying the weaker (cyclists, pedestrians). Vulnerable road users do need protection, and the police seem to have little time for sorting out road offenders, so a techno-fix is an option.
And, yes, I would prefer to get the bad drivers rather that the fast drivers off the road. But how ?
How can it be "too late to retreat" ? If you accelerate you are closing the distance even faster ?
> Except that speeding (ie, violating the posted limit) isn't what is causing traffic accidents.
Even if speeding itself does not *cause* an accident it *does* make the consequences worse.
> If we want people to use less gas, why not just raise the darn price?
Because it is a regressive taxation ? (hits the poor harder than the rich).
> There are times and places for government regulation, but requiring a minimum fuel efficiency?
But you suggest taxation: also government driven !
> If the goal is to reduce greenhouse gases, then fuel efficiency is just a half-assed proxy for fuel consumption.
But is not taxation also ?
Would not rationing have the most direct connection with greenhouse gases ?
(I have 20+ years proffesional programming experience, a good chunk of it in C/C++, and in recent years have spent a lot of time debugging other peoples code, especially ported, re-ported and generally hacked around code !)
IMHO a lot of the posts here are missing the point when they say, "these functions are safe, you just need to check the size before hand" etc. The fact is, in the Real World, not everyone is an ace-programmer, deadlines loom, mistakes get made. Problems do not appear in testing, but can further down the line. IMHO a language simply should *not allow* the programmer to do crazy things. Potential buffer overflows, de-referencing null pointers etc should not get past the *compiler*.
To be honest I do not have a prefered language to suggest, but I do not think that tweaking C is the answer, but better, high level, languages are needed.
> But what would happen to Atlantis in that case? You obviously can't tow it or land it by remote
Why can they not land on remote ?
> reinventing...
and USENET as Web Forums :-(
>> Fedora 11, which is due to be released in about 3 weeks [fedoraproject.org], will have OO3.1
> Arch has had it since yesterday
That's nothing: Gentoo had it days ago: when it has finished compiling I will write a review :-)
Topper.
Will it really help ? All it would take is a small compensation on the drivers behalf to negate any advantage ("ohh: I have the latest pedestrian airbags; I can drive a little faster in crowded streets.")
> I really feel for the BSD guys. Just hope they can keep users.
There are quite a few changes in there, so I can imagine that they will both be happy.
> Translated: People with excellent immune systems are more likely to die than those with weaker ones.
A truly cruel irony.
I am not a doctor, but are not comparisons with the 1918 flu outbreak irrelevant: it passed human to human, whereas this pig flu is only passed pig to human.
Solution: leave the pigs alone (as a vegy I am trying very hard to not say "I told you so" !!)