Fine the phone company for any robocall that they cannot trace. That will motivate them to make the necessary changes to track the originator of the calls, or cut-off those intermediate telcos who refuse.
The problem is that there is no one to fine when the callers originate from India. Perhaps if the perpetrator cannot be found then they could fine the phone company? That fine would quickly motivate the companies to track down the actual originator of the call.
Not really. China and India have much higher population density, whereas the US has more tech companies. The tech people in the US are at 100% employment. Since the US standard of living is so high, US workers rarely want to work for tech companies overseas. Hence, the US either imports labor or outsources. It's supply and demand.
It is funny you mention those skills because those are areas that I personally find the US counterparts to excel at. I know lots of smart coders from abroad, but few have strong business accumen or even an interest in that area. When outsourcing work, on of the toughest barriers is communicating business needs. Often times the offshore workers are capable developers but don't seem to have an interest or knowledge in the business needs. Although much of that may be language barriers or the desire to do things on the cheap.
Some years ago I read an article about how, in India, there is a mentality of doing the cheapest solution even if it isn't sustainable long term. The study sent a bunch of business school interns and grads to India to look at the way they ran the businesses. In one memorable example, a clothing company had only a single piece of some major equipment. When it went down the company had everyone do the work by hand. But the cost of only a short amount of down tome would have easily paid for a second backup piece of equipment. But no one was actually soing the cost-benefit analysis. They found people running businesses who just didn't know how to manage money.
Because the US has low relative population density and a high number of tech companies. Ergo, there is demand for workers outside the US. This is a good thing for the US.
I love that you point out that this security problem was solved decades before the microprocessor was invented, and yet still manufacturers haven't figured this out.
There are lots of people who don't have credit cards or bank accounts at all. They take their pay check to the nearest check cashing service as soon as they receive it. Some of them now allow you to do bill pay right there from your pay check. If they need to buy something online, they go to a retail store and buy an Amazon or iTunes or Visa gift card with cash, then use that to make purchases.
They don't say they "own" them, otherwise if you uploaded the picture to 3 sites then all 3 would "own" them. The probably just require you to grant them license to them. They need the rights to print the pictures. Then they sometimes display them on their photo wall, so they need the license to do that.
Rockwell, McDonnell, and Boeing built the landers for the Gemini and Apollo missions, funded by the US government. How much of the Dragon Capsule was funded by the US government? I'm somewhat unclear on why this new generation is "commercial" but what we did in the 1960's isn't.
Same in my area. One of the rules is that they don't take thermoformed containers. Those containers are labeled as #1, and show the recycling symbol. I'm sure there is some good engineering reason that thermoformed #1 is harder to recycle than other kinds of #1, but after reading the descriptions I'm not even sure how to tell thermoformed containers from... well... whatever the other kind is. If they need to be treated differently, then stop labeling them the same way! Make them #1T or something!
Caveat: I haven't done Java since ~2000, when Java was at version 0.9, in the days of AWT, before Swing existed.
It's interesting that you say Java programmers hate "var" and "lambdas", whereas my experience with C#, C++, and JavaScript programmers is that they are eating it up. C# programmers prefer: var d = new Dictionary<string, int> over the more verbose form. They prefer a lambda over a loop: var x = collection.Find(elem => elem.Age > 15)
What happened in Java that these things are not simply intuitive and awesome? Or is this something about Java culture?
How about "life guard" or "airline pilot." If you watch life guards, then watch for like 30 minutes or so, then switch with another guard. That's because if you stare at the same area of water for long periods of time you completely tune-out. Pilots similarly have a process where the pilot and copilot say to each other something like "scanning 1 o'clock, 2 o'clock, 3'oclock..." because otherwise staring at an empty sky totally desensitizes you. Human brains are terrible watchdogs.
It most certainly does. You only have to read the first paragraph to see it. It says
Google published a blog post with selected findings from its 2018 analysis, highlighting that proposed changes for 2019 would have paid male engineers less than female engineers in one lower-level job category, referred to internally as Level 4 engineers.
If Wired is correct then TechCrunch confused actual pay with a proposed pay scale. Furthermore, this was a single job group. It sounds like Google is cherry picking data to make a point in the court of public opinion, because they are being sued right now over the pay scale discrepency. You go on to say:
There's lots of quotes from a lawyer
There's a single quote from a lawyer, at the end of the article. It's interesting that you managed to read the end but not the beginning.
we predict a double-bit memory error once every 28.5 days". Cut to 2018 - observed upset rate = 28.496 days.
That's GREAT! We ran an experiment that validated our predictions! DO NOT attack studies that aim to test predictions or reproduce existing results. That's the bread-and-butter of science. We have a big problem in science today with funding not going to reproducibility studies. It's more exciting to fund new research, but yet we constantly see headlines about studies not being reproducible.
There essentially no question what space does to computers.
As a consumer of science news, you might think this is well understood and boring and should not be done. But the engineers making such a device probably have lots of questions. For some examples: What was the error rate the same for the first 10 days as it was for the last 10 days? If not, what was the rate of increase over time? Was it linear, polynomial, or exponential? What is the effect of different types of cases? Different die sizes? Are 3D dies more or less susceptable than 2D dies? How was the error rate correlated with solar activity (linear, polynomial exponential, uncorrelated)? What kinds of flash are more susceptible to errors? What is the impact of changing read times, refresh rates, bandwidths, feature sizes,...? How much does ECC memory help? Are there new ECC algorithms that might be better?
All of these kinds of questions are useful for building devices that can survive in deep space. Just because you don't know the data gathered from the experiment does not mean it isn't valuable.
That's not how engineering works. You don't run only in the target environment. Suppose you need to design a computer to run for 5 minutes at 200 degrees C. The engineers would not simply test it for 5 minutes at 200 degrees C. They would run "characterization testing" which means they test it at 100, and 150, and 250. They run it in high humidity and low humidity. They run it at 150 for 5 minutes, then 200 until it dies, to see if running at the lower temperature reduced the longevity. The run it at 200 for 3 minutes, then again at 200 for another 3 minutes, and again, to see if cooling between runs is better or worse. They look at the damage to the product in between. This results in data - which results in predictions - which results in designs.
The tests on the ISS might be very useful. Don't dismiss them merely because they aren't the 100% real environment.
I would prefer that we do more than just analysis before building a $100 million device and sending it to Mars. The next logical step is to use the ISS that we have. If the result of the experiment is "What happened is exactly what we expected to happen" then great! It's the occasional "Oh no! It should have lasted years, but it lasted 2 days because we failed to consider *insert unexpected phenomenon here*"
My favorite part has to be the fake anti-static bracelet, LOL!
But seriously, can I take an entire 10+ minute video, overlay my commentary, and not expect a copyright infringement notice? That does seem like a stretch. I thought that 30-seconds was the court-established precedent for fair use. Consider this: suppose that someone posted a positive commentary on a good video, and the commented version became popular. Every time someone watched the commentary version, the original publisher gets nothing. That doesn't seem fair.
In this case, the mitigating circumstance is that the original video sucked, and it really did deserve a commentary. But from a legal standpoint, posting the entire video does seem to go beyond fair use.
Growing up, a group of children in my neighborhood won an award for some civic duty. The newspaper printed a picture of the group and their first names, all except for one child. That child's parents were outraged that the newspaper wanted to publish that information. The believed that having people know their faces and names presented a danger to them. Or maybe it was a news broadcast now that I think of it. But over time, that kind of thinking mostly died out. That kind of information is so trivial to obtain just by walking around or driving around that protecting it is silly.
Are you suggesting that a video of a child on YouTube, with no last name and no location (which is less information than the newspaper offered) is a cause for concern?
Slashdot Mirror
Fine the phone company for any robocall that they cannot trace. That will motivate them to make the necessary changes to track the originator of the calls, or cut-off those intermediate telcos who refuse.
Europe is a bit ahead of the US in these matters.
The fine is $40,000 in the US.
The problem is that there is no one to fine when the callers originate from India. Perhaps if the perpetrator cannot be found then they could fine the phone company? That fine would quickly motivate the companies to track down the actual originator of the call.
Not really. China and India have much higher population density, whereas the US has more tech companies. The tech people in the US are at 100% employment. Since the US standard of living is so high, US workers rarely want to work for tech companies overseas. Hence, the US either imports labor or outsources. It's supply and demand.
It is funny you mention those skills because those are areas that I personally find the US counterparts to excel at. I know lots of smart coders from abroad, but few have strong business accumen or even an interest in that area. When outsourcing work, on of the toughest barriers is communicating business needs. Often times the offshore workers are capable developers but don't seem to have an interest or knowledge in the business needs. Although much of that may be language barriers or the desire to do things on the cheap.
Some years ago I read an article about how, in India, there is a mentality of doing the cheapest solution even if it isn't sustainable long term. The study sent a bunch of business school interns and grads to India to look at the way they ran the businesses. In one memorable example, a clothing company had only a single piece of some major equipment. When it went down the company had everyone do the work by hand. But the cost of only a short amount of down tome would have easily paid for a second backup piece of equipment. But no one was actually soing the cost-benefit analysis. They found people running businesses who just didn't know how to manage money.
Because the US has low relative population density and a high number of tech companies. Ergo, there is demand for workers outside the US. This is a good thing for the US.
I love that you point out that this security problem was solved decades before the microprocessor was invented, and yet still manufacturers haven't figured this out.
The cashless world has an income barrier.
There are lots of people who don't have credit cards or bank accounts at all. They take their pay check to the nearest check cashing service as soon as they receive it. Some of them now allow you to do bill pay right there from your pay check. If they need to buy something online, they go to a retail store and buy an Amazon or iTunes or Visa gift card with cash, then use that to make purchases.
They don't say they "own" them, otherwise if you uploaded the picture to 3 sites then all 3 would "own" them. The probably just require you to grant them license to them. They need the rights to print the pictures. Then they sometimes display them on their photo wall, so they need the license to do that.
The sentence was commuted, but is that the same as pardoned? I'm unclear as well.
Rockwell, McDonnell, and Boeing built the landers for the Gemini and Apollo missions, funded by the US government. How much of the Dragon Capsule was funded by the US government? I'm somewhat unclear on why this new generation is "commercial" but what we did in the 1960's isn't.
Same in my area. One of the rules is that they don't take thermoformed containers. Those containers are labeled as #1, and show the recycling symbol. I'm sure there is some good engineering reason that thermoformed #1 is harder to recycle than other kinds of #1, but after reading the descriptions I'm not even sure how to tell thermoformed containers from... well... whatever the other kind is. If they need to be treated differently, then stop labeling them the same way! Make them #1T or something!
Caveat: I haven't done Java since ~2000, when Java was at version 0.9, in the days of AWT, before Swing existed.
It's interesting that you say Java programmers hate "var" and "lambdas", whereas my experience with C#, C++, and JavaScript programmers is that they are eating it up. C# programmers prefer:
var d = new Dictionary<string, int> over the more verbose form.
They prefer a lambda over a loop:
var x = collection.Find(elem => elem.Age > 15)
What happened in Java that these things are not simply intuitive and awesome? Or is this something about Java culture?
https://www.vox.com/science-an...
How about "life guard" or "airline pilot." If you watch life guards, then watch for like 30 minutes or so, then switch with another guard. That's because if you stare at the same area of water for long periods of time you completely tune-out. Pilots similarly have a process where the pilot and copilot say to each other something like "scanning 1 o'clock, 2 o'clock, 3'oclock..." because otherwise staring at an empty sky totally desensitizes you. Human brains are terrible watchdogs.
That article says nothing to refute the findings.
It most certainly does. You only have to read the first paragraph to see it. It says
Google published a blog post with selected findings from its 2018 analysis, highlighting that proposed changes for 2019 would have paid male engineers less than female engineers in one lower-level job category, referred to internally as Level 4 engineers.
If Wired is correct then TechCrunch confused actual pay with a proposed pay scale. Furthermore, this was a single job group. It sounds like Google is cherry picking data to make a point in the court of public opinion, because they are being sued right now over the pay scale discrepency. You go on to say:
There's lots of quotes from a lawyer
There's a single quote from a lawyer, at the end of the article. It's interesting that you managed to read the end but not the beginning.
Are Men at Google Paid Less Than Women? Not Really.
we predict a double-bit memory error once every 28.5 days". Cut to 2018 - observed upset rate = 28.496 days.
That's GREAT! We ran an experiment that validated our predictions! DO NOT attack studies that aim to test predictions or reproduce existing results. That's the bread-and-butter of science. We have a big problem in science today with funding not going to reproducibility studies. It's more exciting to fund new research, but yet we constantly see headlines about studies not being reproducible.
There essentially no question what space does to computers.
As a consumer of science news, you might think this is well understood and boring and should not be done. But the engineers making such a device probably have lots of questions. For some examples: What was the error rate the same for the first 10 days as it was for the last 10 days? If not, what was the rate of increase over time? Was it linear, polynomial, or exponential? What is the effect of different types of cases? Different die sizes? Are 3D dies more or less susceptable than 2D dies? How was the error rate correlated with solar activity (linear, polynomial exponential, uncorrelated)? What kinds of flash are more susceptible to errors? What is the impact of changing read times, refresh rates, bandwidths, feature sizes, ...? How much does ECC memory help? Are there new ECC algorithms that might be better?
All of these kinds of questions are useful for building devices that can survive in deep space. Just because you don't know the data gathered from the experiment does not mean it isn't valuable.
That's not how engineering works. You don't run only in the target environment. Suppose you need to design a computer to run for 5 minutes at 200 degrees C. The engineers would not simply test it for 5 minutes at 200 degrees C. They would run "characterization testing" which means they test it at 100, and 150, and 250. They run it in high humidity and low humidity. They run it at 150 for 5 minutes, then 200 until it dies, to see if running at the lower temperature reduced the longevity. The run it at 200 for 3 minutes, then again at 200 for another 3 minutes, and again, to see if cooling between runs is better or worse. They look at the damage to the product in between. This results in data - which results in predictions - which results in designs.
The tests on the ISS might be very useful. Don't dismiss them merely because they aren't the 100% real environment.
Analysis alone...
I would prefer that we do more than just analysis before building a $100 million device and sending it to Mars. The next logical step is to use the ISS that we have. If the result of the experiment is "What happened is exactly what we expected to happen" then great! It's the occasional "Oh no! It should have lasted years, but it lasted 2 days because we failed to consider *insert unexpected phenomenon here*"
Why is MicroSD limited to a single chip? Is this a physicals space limitation?
1. Bob lives.
2. Bob creates art.
3. Bob later finds out he is actually an artificial intelligence.
Is Bob's art no longer art?
You are correct about the 30-second rule. That seems to be a myth.
My favorite part has to be the fake anti-static bracelet, LOL!
But seriously, can I take an entire 10+ minute video, overlay my commentary, and not expect a copyright infringement notice? That does seem like a stretch. I thought that 30-seconds was the court-established precedent for fair use. Consider this: suppose that someone posted a positive commentary on a good video, and the commented version became popular. Every time someone watched the commentary version, the original publisher gets nothing. That doesn't seem fair.
In this case, the mitigating circumstance is that the original video sucked, and it really did deserve a commentary. But from a legal standpoint, posting the entire video does seem to go beyond fair use.
Yes.
Growing up, a group of children in my neighborhood won an award for some civic duty. The newspaper printed a picture of the group and their first names, all except for one child. That child's parents were outraged that the newspaper wanted to publish that information. The believed that having people know their faces and names presented a danger to them. Or maybe it was a news broadcast now that I think of it. But over time, that kind of thinking mostly died out. That kind of information is so trivial to obtain just by walking around or driving around that protecting it is silly.
Are you suggesting that a video of a child on YouTube, with no last name and no location (which is less information than the newspaper offered) is a cause for concern?
The characters are "Sun-Man" and "The Son of Man" *facepalm*