>> it seems questionable whether such moves (vague as they are at this point) on Microsoft's part will assure anyone that it hasn't been compromised by government sources
I'm genuinely surprised that apparently some people still exist that think Microsoft might actually not be providing the government with backdoors and feeds of everything that goes anywhere near their products and/or servers.
I'm sorry if my not being able to afford to buy a statistically significant number of drives of each model across WD's entire range then test then all before I form an opinion of the company is troubling you, Dork. As far as I'm concerned, the inconvenience and hole in my wallet from a perfect 100% failure rate within a year of all the WD drives I bought already speaks clear enough to me at least.
>> I still think WD makes the best quality out there, but that's just my opinion.
Not in my experience. Some while ago I've had several Raptor (10k RPM) drives, they cost a whole lot for their capacity mostly because of their performance, but I also seem to remember they were meant to be enterprise quality. None of them lasted more than a year or so. One went down in like 3 months.
>> The difference between two unique individual humans who are not siblings or parent/child is greater than the difference between the statistical median or mean of women and the statistical median or mean of men.
>> It doesn't matter if you don't like it, it's a fact.
It can't be a fact. Think about it. There must be at least some cases where it isn't true therefore its not a "fact".
>> They propose this may explain why women have been found to be better multitaskers
Citation please. This is not self-evident. In fact I for one don't believe that women are actually any better than men at multitasking.
From many personal observations I've come to a pretty much inescapable conclusion that while many women do clearly believe they can multitask well, in reality they perform each task very poorly (i.e. just as badly or even worse than men) when attempting to do them concurrently. If one of those tasks is driving, all the other road users better watch out.
Men seem more inclined to a sequential rather than concurrent approach, not because they can't multitask as well/badly as women, rather they want to do each task more properly. Again this is just my personal theory based on observing many real-life cases over 50 years, of which nearly all have pretty much (re)(re)(re)confirmed this.
Agreed. The big problem is that apparently all they teach at MBA school these days is that if you can't directly measure something in dollars or hours, it doesn't actually exist.
Managers just can't get their head around things like the need for quality or experience because it doesn't have an immediately measurable value, meaning it can't fit in the spreadsheet that has replaced their ability to think.
Why wouldn't "my influences are primarily my own 35 years of wide experience" be a good answer?
The reality is that most new things are actually the same old rehashed ideas and concepts continually re-dredged up and re-lablelled, When you've been around for a while you get to recognise the same patterns over and over again clearly.
The problem comes where someone is surprised that I dont know all about such-and-such from some new book.
Pretty much every time this happens, I look into it and have completely seen it all before under another name, or no name at all, because many times its describing what is just basic common sense to us old farts.
More often than not I have already tried and decided about the same concept years before some bright spark thinks they have just discovered something new and highly insightful and writes a book about it.
Whats worse is that book becomes flavour of the month to interviewers, who mostly can only word-match on skill names, because they often haven't a clue about the actual field they're trying to employ people for, or what the job really takes, so they just don't get it, or believe me, and hire the monkey who remembered the book title instead.
I've been trying to find a remote working software developer job for a long time, and there simply aren't and haven't been any at all, unless you want to be paid peanuts and do web development.
Public Key Cryptography is just another of the many things that the US claims they invented, but was actually invented by the British and just 'better marketed' by the US. However as the British research was for the UK government/military it was kept secret until sometime after the conference where Diffie anounced his own research. It is terefore clear that Diffie/Helmann were acting completely independently of the British work and also announced it first.
That said, even if he takes care to always cite the British, in my opinion his still claiming to being the inventor of public key cryptography now the truth about the earlier British effort is out, is pretty much unjustifiable in my eyes.
Actually I've often wondered why people dont sue the USPTO for that or something similar. I read somewhere that in the US if you sue the police and win, you cant get legal costs awarded too, so consequently not may people risk suing the police. Is it the same with any government agency? (i.e. including the USPTO?)
no... we just think that we know more about things like science, technology, engineering and software development than slimy MBA types. And in 35 years of work I've hardly ever seen that actually proved wrong.
If you can't easily calculate a dollar value of something, it must be 0.
This rule alone is why all MBAs refuse to see any downside exists to strategies that inevitably create more rework, or piss off key customers enough to impact future sales.
>> Tesla is about to push an 'over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension that will create more ground clearance at highway speeds.
This is probably all a stupid kneejerk reaction. The suspension was likely already at the ideal height as determined by a lot of windtunnel etc research. Doing this will certainly create more lift under the car and so quite a lot less efficiency all in the name of being seen to be doing something visible (but actually pointless and only negative) in response to a microscopically small chance of another similar accident.
It just occurred to me that this is a whole lot like the retarded thinking behind the creation and continued existence of the TSA.
>> The C.I.A. and other American spy agencies, as well as the Pentagon, suspect that the monitor stations would give the Russians a foothold on American territory that would sharpen the accuracy of Moscow's satellite-steered weapons.
This just seems to emphasise how many old dudes still doing outdated cold-war era thinking there are in the US government/military. Call me strange but I think Russia is probably near the bottom of the threat list of organisations that would militarily attack the US homeland. That said I would be VERY surprised if the real purpose of those "GPS" stations weren't to provide cover for monitoring operations on US telecommunications. I guess nobody told the Russians that you can get Rush Limbaugh through the internet now.
I dont see what the US has to potentially gain from allowing this at all, so why they would even apparently be considering it?
Because your'e quickly resorting to non sequiturs and personal insults rather than making logical or even cogent points, I'm guessing you're either or both of a democrat or female.
>> How exactly do you suppose the box knows what the speed limit is?
GPS for location against a corresponding database of all road speed limits.
>> Once again, speed is not a metric. Wanna bet? Try driving over say 80 anywhere at all (even safely/legally, such as on a private runway or drag strip) and then just sit back and enjoy the large effect on your next insurance premium.
>> and put that money in an account managed by the government, and let them manage the insurance?
Seriously? You want to let the same government that is responsible for massive overspend and the obamacare website also manage your insurance? wow.
Governments have never been any good at managing things effectively. Every government in the world has proved that over and over. Let governments legislate and let companies manage things. At least the 'for-profit' thing keeps companies very focussed on being as efficient as possible. The government have no such motivation. Their only drive is to eternally seek more control over everything, so all they know how to do is to add beauracracy to everything. When all you have are lawyers and bureaucrats, all you get is ever more increasing layers of rules and very expensive paperwork, which is not conducive to actually running anything well.
Slashdot Mirror
>> it seems questionable whether such moves (vague as they are at this point) on Microsoft's part will assure anyone that it hasn't been compromised by government sources
I'm genuinely surprised that apparently some people still exist that think Microsoft might actually not be providing the government with backdoors and feeds of everything that goes anywhere near their products and/or servers.
The disks would still spin so unless it was just affecting the rotational speed slightly, it didn't seem that power drive was the problem.
They did indeed run slightly hotter than regular drives, but I also did have them in actively cooled/ventilated bays separated with good clearance.
I'm sorry if my not being able to afford to buy a statistically significant number of drives of each model across WD's entire range then test then all before I form an opinion of the company is troubling you, Dork.
As far as I'm concerned, the inconvenience and hole in my wallet from a perfect 100% failure rate within a year of all the WD drives I bought already speaks clear enough to me at least.
>> I still think WD makes the best quality out there, but that's just my opinion.
Not in my experience. Some while ago I've had several Raptor (10k RPM) drives, they cost a whole lot for their capacity mostly because of their performance, but I also seem to remember they were meant to be enterprise quality.
None of them lasted more than a year or so. One went down in like 3 months.
>> The difference between two unique individual humans who are not siblings or parent/child is greater than the difference between the statistical median or mean of women and the statistical median or mean of men.
>> It doesn't matter if you don't like it, it's a fact.
It can't be a fact. Think about it. There must be at least some cases where it isn't true therefore its not a "fact".
Yet another HMD with a really crappy resolution (960x540).
Why is 1920x1080 (per eye) still apparently too much to expect these days?
Well done for promoting the all-men-are-stupid stereotype. Even if it was really meant as a joke.
I read that a while ago.. and stopped when I felt it was basically yet another quasi-academic forum for the feminist agenda.
>> They propose this may explain why women have been found to be better multitaskers
Citation please. This is not self-evident. In fact I for one don't believe that women are actually any better than men at multitasking.
From many personal observations I've come to a pretty much inescapable conclusion that while many women do clearly believe they can multitask well, in reality they perform each task very poorly (i.e. just as badly or even worse than men) when attempting to do them concurrently. If one of those tasks is driving, all the other road users better watch out.
Men seem more inclined to a sequential rather than concurrent approach, not because they can't multitask as well/badly as women, rather they want to do each task more properly. Again this is just my personal theory based on observing many real-life cases over 50 years, of which nearly all have pretty much (re)(re)(re)confirmed this.
We should have never allowed them to pull down the fire beacons.
Agreed. The big problem is that apparently all they teach at MBA school these days is that if you can't directly measure something in dollars or hours, it doesn't actually exist.
Managers just can't get their head around things like the need for quality or experience because it doesn't have an immediately measurable value, meaning it can't fit in the spreadsheet that has replaced their ability to think.
Why wouldn't "my influences are primarily my own 35 years of wide experience" be a good answer?
The reality is that most new things are actually the same old rehashed ideas and concepts continually re-dredged up and re-lablelled, When you've been around for a while you get to recognise the same patterns over and over again clearly.
The problem comes where someone is surprised that I dont know all about such-and-such from some new book.
Pretty much every time this happens, I look into it and have completely seen it all before under another name, or no name at all, because many times its describing what is just basic common sense to us old farts.
More often than not I have already tried and decided about the same concept years before some bright spark thinks they have just discovered something new and highly insightful and writes a book about it.
Whats worse is that book becomes flavour of the month to interviewers, who mostly can only word-match on skill names, because they often haven't a clue about the actual field they're trying to employ people for, or what the job really takes, so they just don't get it, or believe me, and hire the monkey who remembered the book title instead.
Its not your age its the remote working thing.
I've been trying to find a remote working software developer job for a long time, and there simply aren't and haven't been any at all, unless you want to be paid peanuts and do web development.
Its that simple.
Public Key Cryptography is just another of the many things that the US claims they invented, but was actually invented by the British and just 'better marketed' by the US.
However as the British research was for the UK government/military it was kept secret until sometime after the conference where Diffie anounced his own research. It is terefore clear that Diffie/Helmann were acting completely independently of the British work and also announced it first.
That said, even if he takes care to always cite the British, in my opinion his still claiming to being the inventor of public key cryptography now the truth about the earlier British effort is out, is pretty much unjustifiable in my eyes.
Actually I've often wondered why people dont sue the USPTO for that or something similar.
I read somewhere that in the US if you sue the police and win, you cant get legal costs awarded too, so consequently not may people risk suing the police.
Is it the same with any government agency? (i.e. including the USPTO?)
Trolls 1, good guys 0.
Stupid judge/jury.
At least it sounds like NewEgg will take it higher.
no... we just think that we know more about things like science, technology, engineering and software development than slimy MBA types. And in 35 years of work I've hardly ever seen that actually proved wrong.
You missed by far the most important one:
If you can't easily calculate a dollar value of something, it must be 0.
This rule alone is why all MBAs refuse to see any downside exists to strategies that inevitably create more rework, or piss off key customers enough to impact future sales.
>> Tesla is about to push an 'over-the-air update' to its vehicles' air suspension that will create more ground clearance at highway speeds.
This is probably all a stupid kneejerk reaction. The suspension was likely already at the ideal height as determined by a lot of windtunnel etc research. Doing this will certainly create more lift under the car and so quite a lot less efficiency all in the name of being seen to be doing something visible (but actually pointless and only negative) in response to a microscopically small chance of another similar accident.
It just occurred to me that this is a whole lot like the retarded thinking behind the creation and continued existence of the TSA.
Bring back Guru Meditation.
>> The C.I.A. and other American spy agencies, as well as the Pentagon, suspect that the monitor stations would give the Russians a foothold on American territory that would sharpen the accuracy of Moscow's satellite-steered weapons.
This just seems to emphasise how many old dudes still doing outdated cold-war era thinking there are in the US government/military. Call me strange but I think Russia is probably near the bottom of the threat list of organisations that would militarily attack the US homeland. That said I would be VERY surprised if the real purpose of those "GPS" stations weren't to provide cover for monitoring operations on US telecommunications. I guess nobody told the Russians that you can get Rush Limbaugh through the internet now.
I dont see what the US has to potentially gain from allowing this at all, so why they would even apparently be considering it?
Because your'e quickly resorting to non sequiturs and personal insults rather than making logical or even cogent points, I'm guessing you're either or both of a democrat or female.
>> How exactly do you suppose the box knows what the speed limit is?
GPS for location against a corresponding database of all road speed limits.
>> Once again, speed is not a metric.
Wanna bet? Try driving over say 80 anywhere at all (even safely/legally, such as on a private runway or drag strip) and then just sit back and enjoy the large effect on your next insurance premium.
>> and put that money in an account managed by the government, and let them manage the insurance?
Seriously? You want to let the same government that is responsible for massive overspend and the obamacare website also manage your insurance? wow.
Governments have never been any good at managing things effectively. Every government in the world has proved that over and over. Let governments legislate and let companies manage things. At least the 'for-profit' thing keeps companies very focussed on being as efficient as possible. The government have no such motivation. Their only drive is to eternally seek more control over everything, so all they know how to do is to add beauracracy to everything. When all you have are lawyers and bureaucrats, all you get is ever more increasing layers of rules and very expensive paperwork, which is not conducive to actually running anything well.