city-owned roads are much the same as they were 50 years ago, same for sewer pipes
What shithole do you live in where they haven't upgraded any roads in 50 years? Is your city shrinking in size because theres no way any city, with normal growth, has the same traffic it did 50 years ago. No roads have ever been made wider? No new roads have been added?
Your argument is bunk, its just your ignorance of how your city has dealt with the need for additional capacity either due stupidity or willfully ignoring the obvious upgrades that have been made.
a public corporation's responsibility is to its shareholders and their interests
No. A corporations responsibility is to fulfill its charter, that may mean 'make the most money possible', it may not.
Shareholders only really get to argue about fulfilling that goal, if the goal is to feed the world, the shareholders can't bitch about not making money, only about feeding the world.
Your 300 x 10GB ports on 50 Servers is... not efficient. Additionally, you're not likely saturating your 60GB off a single server, and you're running those six 10GB connections per server to try to eliminate other issues you have, without understanding them.
You haven't worked with large scale virtualization much, have you?
The problem is that you want to post publicly but you don't want anyone to know its you posting publicly.
If you don't want people knowing about your kink, post it privately or not at all because for everything else, you're not one of the 0.001% of the population who is actually capable of keeping two separate identities that can't easily be linked.
At start, Facebook required real names, was limited to university students at specific schools, you couldn't even invite people outside of there, and had useful features.
On the other hand, getting a G+ invite was never difficult, they gave they'd give people like 20 a day.
Stop quoting that single court case bullshit. The case was dismissed because of an overly broad statement in the way the FAA filed it. The judge pretty much told them to narrow it down and I'll see you again in 3 months... which it will go through. Guess what... that very case is already back in the schedule to be retried.
And for reference. There have been 2 cases dismissed. One was retried and found in favor of the FAA and the fine stood, the second is on the schedule for retrial.
I fly UAVs to take pictures of real estate for realtors as well as construction jobs and other various things. I do it 'for fun at cost' which means I pretty much never charge unless I'm asked to do something that results in damage to my UAV. I'm also carrying a few million dollars worth of liability coverage for this purpose.
The 'good shots' are often the ones that would put me well into areas that it is perfectly legal to fly passenger carrying light aircraft, which is only 500 feet outside of congested areas. To get good framing, 500 feet isn't that high. In a city its actually better because higher shots aren't generally as useful unless you're trying to get a tall building because you have to crop so much out of the shot anyway (no one wants to advertise someone ELSEs buildings) and the minimum altitude for aircraft there is 1000 or 2000 feet above obstructions (depending on various other aspects too numerous to get into here)
However, I easily get 'good enough' shots from below 400 feet in most cases. The only problems are large estates where you need to be higher to get enough of the place in view.
Expecting CA's to be able to reliably fight off professional hackers from dozens of governments and never ever fail is likely an impossible standard to ever meet.
Yet that is exactly what they are supposed to do. Its not even really that hard.
Every CA hack to date has been preventable as was the fault of the CA simply not putting the required effort into doing their job or being flat out malicious. Stop trying to make it out like its an uber hard job, its not.
You aren't looking very hard then, I know several people who are very good developers, including a Google developer who had to move due to family reasons and simply couldn't stay at Google. I assure you, she was qualified for anything she applied for. So maybe you live in that one place that doesn't have any qualified workers, but since there are people claiming that pretty much everywhere, I call bullshit.
or reject it for reasons other than the salary, such as commute distance.
Another bullshit line. They really went through the entire interview process and THEN decided the commute was too much? That makes no sense at all. You seem to think that these people would waste their time letting you interview them when they never had any intention of taking the offer. That would be pretty stupid and as such makes it hard to believe your version of the story.
We pay $80k-$90k for college graduate starting salaries
Sure you do. Even in the shittiest places to work as far as location and cost of living, you'd have grads beating your door down for the job, moving there from all over the country.
, and a median of $150k for developers with five or more years experience.
Are you in hiring at office int he middle of Manhattan or San Fran? If so, thats not that impressive considering cost of living and experience.
Your entire post just sounds completely unbelievable like its being embellished for you to provide excuses for why you can't hire anyone or pretend that you're even trying.
Then you've never used Google Glass or have put much thought into what is technically possible with the hardware.
Hint: He's not using it for anything like you might expect and those silly stories you've ready about people overlaying useful information on real world problems are bullshit, none (repeat NONE) of the sensors in glass are accurate enough to do so.
Glass is a joke, ask anyone who has ACTUALLY used one. Its just silly at this stage.
And yes, I have a Glass prototype my former employer paid for. Even with it being his money, it was still a waste of money.
Why do you believe that there must be a religious explanation for a "soul"?
Why do you believe there must not be a religious explanation for a soul?
Ot goes both ways based on current evidence. There is evidence that the soul is a quantum phenomenon that can not be simply created (for varying definitions of simply) and this possibly explains so many things. I acknowledge its only a possibility and the theory has only a small amount of evidence but you have exactly none to back your statements.
In quantum fluctuations that happen to reside for some time in part of your brain.
There is already decent evidence that the 'soul' is a quantum phenomenon, which allows it to reside both in your brain and survive death at the same time and it explains all sorts of other odd 'miracles' that occur as well as things like telepathy and twins seeming to 'feel' their twin even from great distances.
This satisfies both the religious definition and the OMG GOD DOESN'T EXIST AND I HATE THE IDEA definition.
Get over it it and accept theres more too it than you understand.
Your head has very few pain receptors in it, neural surgery is pretty much painless after you get into the skull even with no anastasia at all, hence why they can probe the brain while you are full conscious and aware.
But maybe we'll hit some point where it all cascades very quickly.
If we ever create even minor AI that can learn on its own like humans do, then it can easily cascade very quickly as it turns into simply 'adding cores' and letting the AI improve itself.
Replace 'adding cores' with whatever is actually relevant to the technology of the time.
Googles car has been programmed to know how to drive. It can not learn how to fly. It can not learn how to build a new copy of itself. It can not learn to bake a loaf of bread.
Then you shouldn't have allowed it to be sold in the first place.
The whole thing is still silly, a single person like Bill Gates, Larry Ellison or Steve Job's wife (to pick the popular easy to recognize names) can easily out fund this PAC with nothing more than a signature and a laugh about it... there are thousands of people who can do it. This PAC is one.
... no, it means you just committed perjury, and in order for your request to be taken seriously by anyone of any importance (like github) they're going to communicate with you first, so they'll know who you actually are.
Better still, the company claiming infringement has to claim a monetary cost with the DMCA take down request, and if its bogus, they have to pay at least twice that back, half to the ISP/hoster, half to whomever they made the false claim against.
i.e. I file a DMCA request against your content on github., I must claim the monetary damages I expect should I go to court. If you counter the claim, you have the option of requiring a hearing. That hearing results in me getting my monetary claim (and not a penny more) against you and the take down stays down, or I have to pay twice the amount I claimed, half to you, half to github, and it goes back up.
And if they record to a VHS tape, I might be concerned. Once it hits the MPEG encoder, not so much. The entire point of MPEG is to throw out as much data as possible if it isn't perceptible by humans and recreate it as something that is much smaller but looks the same to human senses.
MPEG is perceptual encoding. The imperceptible would be lost by design, not because they were trying to ensure privacy but simply as a side effect of the design.
Yes, they could easily design cameras that could use stenography to encode data in the mpeg stream that would survive, but that isn't what we're discussing. We're discussing power line noise making its way through the entire system and being used to ID a recordings location.
Even so, assuming an analog recording, I'm still inclined to believe it would rarely work just based on modern electronics having so much built in power supply conversions and filtering. Digital ballasts for example are going to make it hard to see fluctuations in lighting.
Slashdot Mirror
city-owned roads are much the same as they were 50 years ago, same for sewer pipes
What shithole do you live in where they haven't upgraded any roads in 50 years? Is your city shrinking in size because theres no way any city, with normal growth, has the same traffic it did 50 years ago. No roads have ever been made wider? No new roads have been added?
Your argument is bunk, its just your ignorance of how your city has dealt with the need for additional capacity either due stupidity or willfully ignoring the obvious upgrades that have been made.
a public corporation's responsibility is to its shareholders and their interests
No. A corporations responsibility is to fulfill its charter, that may mean 'make the most money possible', it may not.
Shareholders only really get to argue about fulfilling that goal, if the goal is to feed the world, the shareholders can't bitch about not making money, only about feeding the world.
Actually, it is fast because it does nothing, and thats also the point.
You don't use Apache to serve boat loads of static files, you use Nginx.
You don't use Nginx to serve ASP.NET or Java EE apps.
Your 300 x 10GB ports on 50 Servers is ... not efficient. Additionally, you're not likely saturating your 60GB off a single server, and you're running those six 10GB connections per server to try to eliminate other issues you have, without understanding them.
You haven't worked with large scale virtualization much, have you?
Then why are you posting publicly?
The problem is that you want to post publicly but you don't want anyone to know its you posting publicly.
If you don't want people knowing about your kink, post it privately or not at all because for everything else, you're not one of the 0.001% of the population who is actually capable of keeping two separate identities that can't easily be linked.
Ironic you say those things.
At start, Facebook required real names, was limited to university students at specific schools, you couldn't even invite people outside of there, and had useful features.
On the other hand, getting a G+ invite was never difficult, they gave they'd give people like 20 a day.
Stop quoting that single court case bullshit. The case was dismissed because of an overly broad statement in the way the FAA filed it. The judge pretty much told them to narrow it down and I'll see you again in 3 months ... which it will go through. Guess what ... that very case is already back in the schedule to be retried.
And for reference. There have been 2 cases dismissed. One was retried and found in favor of the FAA and the fine stood, the second is on the schedule for retrial.
I fly UAVs to take pictures of real estate for realtors as well as construction jobs and other various things. I do it 'for fun at cost' which means I pretty much never charge unless I'm asked to do something that results in damage to my UAV. I'm also carrying a few million dollars worth of liability coverage for this purpose.
The 'good shots' are often the ones that would put me well into areas that it is perfectly legal to fly passenger carrying light aircraft, which is only 500 feet outside of congested areas. To get good framing, 500 feet isn't that high. In a city its actually better because higher shots aren't generally as useful unless you're trying to get a tall building because you have to crop so much out of the shot anyway (no one wants to advertise someone ELSEs buildings) and the minimum altitude for aircraft there is 1000 or 2000 feet above obstructions (depending on various other aspects too numerous to get into here)
However, I easily get 'good enough' shots from below 400 feet in most cases. The only problems are large estates where you need to be higher to get enough of the place in view.
I'd tell him to stop watching Kevin Smith movies and leave it at that.
Expecting CA's to be able to reliably fight off professional hackers from dozens of governments and never ever fail is likely an impossible standard to ever meet.
Yet that is exactly what they are supposed to do. Its not even really that hard.
Every CA hack to date has been preventable as was the fault of the CA simply not putting the required effort into doing their job or being flat out malicious. Stop trying to make it out like its an uber hard job, its not.
Both JavaScript and Dart are strongly typed
Someone has no idea what strongly typed means ...
and by someone, I mean you.
FTL. Never had any "iOS specific content". They had announced the new features well before any mention of an iOS port.
Your story sounds like BS.
We are simply not finding many qualified people
You aren't looking very hard then, I know several people who are very good developers, including a Google developer who had to move due to family reasons and simply couldn't stay at Google. I assure you, she was qualified for anything she applied for. So maybe you live in that one place that doesn't have any qualified workers, but since there are people claiming that pretty much everywhere, I call bullshit.
or reject it for reasons other than the salary, such as commute distance.
Another bullshit line. They really went through the entire interview process and THEN decided the commute was too much? That makes no sense at all. You seem to think that these people would waste their time letting you interview them when they never had any intention of taking the offer. That would be pretty stupid and as such makes it hard to believe your version of the story.
We pay $80k-$90k for college graduate starting salaries
Sure you do. Even in the shittiest places to work as far as location and cost of living, you'd have grads beating your door down for the job, moving there from all over the country.
, and a median of $150k for developers with five or more years experience.
Are you in hiring at office int he middle of Manhattan or San Fran? If so, thats not that impressive considering cost of living and experience.
Your entire post just sounds completely unbelievable like its being embellished for you to provide excuses for why you can't hire anyone or pretend that you're even trying.
http://science.slashdot.org/st...
Its not like it was my idea, but thanks for proving that you're just an arrogant close minded douche.
:( stupid autocorrect fixing my poor spelling
Then you've never used Google Glass or have put much thought into what is technically possible with the hardware.
Hint: He's not using it for anything like you might expect and those silly stories you've ready about people overlaying useful information on real world problems are bullshit, none (repeat NONE) of the sensors in glass are accurate enough to do so.
Glass is a joke, ask anyone who has ACTUALLY used one. Its just silly at this stage.
And yes, I have a Glass prototype my former employer paid for. Even with it being his money, it was still a waste of money.
Why do you believe that there must be a religious explanation for a "soul"?
Why do you believe there must not be a religious explanation for a soul?
Ot goes both ways based on current evidence. There is evidence that the soul is a quantum phenomenon that can not be simply created (for varying definitions of simply) and this possibly explains so many things. I acknowledge its only a possibility and the theory has only a small amount of evidence but you have exactly none to back your statements.
In quantum fluctuations that happen to reside for some time in part of your brain.
There is already decent evidence that the 'soul' is a quantum phenomenon, which allows it to reside both in your brain and survive death at the same time and it explains all sorts of other odd 'miracles' that occur as well as things like telepathy and twins seeming to 'feel' their twin even from great distances.
This satisfies both the religious definition and the OMG GOD DOESN'T EXIST AND I HATE THE IDEA definition.
Get over it it and accept theres more too it than you understand.
Your head has very few pain receptors in it, neural surgery is pretty much painless after you get into the skull even with no anastasia at all, hence why they can probe the brain while you are full conscious and aware.
So, no, it isn't going to hurt like blazes.
But maybe we'll hit some point where it all cascades very quickly.
If we ever create even minor AI that can learn on its own like humans do, then it can easily cascade very quickly as it turns into simply 'adding cores' and letting the AI improve itself.
Replace 'adding cores' with whatever is actually relevant to the technology of the time.
Googles car has been programmed to know how to drive. It can not learn how to fly. It can not learn how to build a new copy of itself. It can not learn to bake a loaf of bread.
It is in no way AI.
Then you shouldn't have allowed it to be sold in the first place.
The whole thing is still silly, a single person like Bill Gates, Larry Ellison or Steve Job's wife (to pick the popular easy to recognize names) can easily out fund this PAC with nothing more than a signature and a laugh about it ... there are thousands of people who can do it. This PAC is one.
... no, it means you just committed perjury, and in order for your request to be taken seriously by anyone of any importance (like github) they're going to communicate with you first, so they'll know who you actually are.
Better still, the company claiming infringement has to claim a monetary cost with the DMCA take down request, and if its bogus, they have to pay at least twice that back, half to the ISP/hoster, half to whomever they made the false claim against.
i.e. I file a DMCA request against your content on github., I must claim the monetary damages I expect should I go to court. If you counter the claim, you have the option of requiring a hearing. That hearing results in me getting my monetary claim (and not a penny more) against you and the take down stays down, or I have to pay twice the amount I claimed, half to you, half to github, and it goes back up.
Lets see how this shit goes under those rules.
And if they record to a VHS tape, I might be concerned. Once it hits the MPEG encoder, not so much. The entire point of MPEG is to throw out as much data as possible if it isn't perceptible by humans and recreate it as something that is much smaller but looks the same to human senses.
MPEG is perceptual encoding. The imperceptible would be lost by design, not because they were trying to ensure privacy but simply as a side effect of the design.
Yes, they could easily design cameras that could use stenography to encode data in the mpeg stream that would survive, but that isn't what we're discussing. We're discussing power line noise making its way through the entire system and being used to ID a recordings location.
Even so, assuming an analog recording, I'm still inclined to believe it would rarely work just based on modern electronics having so much built in power supply conversions and filtering. Digital ballasts for example are going to make it hard to see fluctuations in lighting.