His 2nd go was awesome and Apple became a powerhouse. But his 1st go nearly killed Apple and he was tossed out.
So, which is he? Exceptional leader or value killing loser? He did both at various times.
Both - kind of. His first go round with Apple he took it to the top of the industry (Apple ][), got arrogant, and then got too far ahead of the market (Lisa), came back with the early Mac, but got kicked out for being hard to work with - he wasn't very personable to the Board Of Directors and others that he needed to cull favor with in order to keep the company. He left, created Next Computing, learned from his mistake, so when he returned (via Apple buying Next) he improved where it mattered to stay in control. He was a genius in tech and marketing - far more than Gates ever was - the whole time.
First, with respect to computers in general I wholeheartedly agree. Software Developers have become atrocious in their disregard for resources, and I lay that mostly at the hands of the rise of Computer Science which teaches towards the perfect computer (all RAM, CPU, storage, etc you need is there) as well as communities like Java where the motto is "just throw more hardware at it". Then you have the devs and managers that don't want to spend the time or resources to optimize the system - often going tossing out the idea of "premature optimization" in order to prioritize other things. All-in-all the software industry as a whole is just downright a disaster in this area and shows no sign of solving it any where in the next few decades.
Second, with respect the "16 GB Android phone" bit...this is more due to a change in the base Android OS and shifting to push stuff into the Google Play app store in response to phone manufacturers and telco's not keeping software up-to-date. What happened? Google wrote functionality for Android Devs that pushes requires features for one base (f.e Android SDK 24) into the app so it can run on older devices that have another base (f.e Android SDK 20). The result is app sizes bloat more and more over time - the app gets updated (f.e now requires Android SDK 28) so the layer grows; even though the app itself might not have changed much in size, the package overall jumps majorly in size. So you can't quite blame software devs on this one - it's more out of their control. If the telco's would push updates out faster and device manufacturers would actually maintain devices longer (f.e 2 yrs like they have said they would, especially Motorola) then this would be even less of an issue.
And honestly, I haven't seen 16GB as being sufficient for a very long time - even back in 2015 32GB was a far better choice.
The article you linked? You've completely read it wrong. Or you're lying.
I hear crap like yours from so many people. Who is disseminating this misinformation to you? And every time we investigate, it's so obviously wrong!
TFA:
It's still a well-known issue in the States. For example, when I lived in Michigan (Grand Rapids area) we had recycling ($4 fee per month too); found out later they collected it separately but it still was always just dumped into the landfill.
Wrong. Compute Science is the theoretical side of programming, and very much behaves like it. It came out of the Mathematical departments.
Not wrong, just shortsighted.
Yes, computer science stems from mathematics, but it emerged after, and in response to, the imvention of electronic computers.
You can do computer science without hardware, but there is no reason to. Without computers, "computer science" is just a collection of otherwise-unrelated math subfields.
Programming existed long before Computer Science existed and came out of the Electrical Engineering field - the Applied Sciences, before even the "electronic computer".
Computer Science came about as mathematicians got involved in the field *after* computer languages started sprouting up. EE's also have high training in math - oddly sometimes more than CS folks. As the theoretical side took hold it moved to the Math oriented folks and took hold in and grew out of the Math departments. CS didn't even exist until the last 1960's, wasn't official until sometime in the 1970's, and didn't really become popular until the 1990's.
Interestingly, the conversion of Computer Programming from being based in EE to being based in CS has also largely corresponded with decline of women participating in the overarching field. (Though one cannot say the transition caused such an effect.)
> Edsger W. Dijkstra... in fact shouldn't, involve actual computers at all.
Computer Science is an applied science..
Wrong. Compute Science is the theoretical side of programming, and very much behaves like it. It came out of the Mathematical departments. The Applied Science is Software Engineering, which most schools fail to teach at all. It's more akin to Computer Engineering but with a higher software focus.
Dijkstra was an idiot who thought that only theory should be taught.
* In theory performance shouldn't matter
* In practiceit does.
Implementation details do matter regardless of many fucking cluesless profs try to handwave them. For example, how do you sort your data when it fit into available RAM? There is a reason why Map Reduce was invented.
Focus solely on theory is the wrong approach. There are 3 types of optimizations that a programmer needs to understand.
2. Algorithmic
Spending time to optimize a bubble sort is a complete waste of time when you could use mergesort, quicksort, etc.
3. Macro-optimization (or cache-orientated) aka (Data-Orientated Design)
Techniques such as Memoization exist for a reason.
A good programmer learns HOW to optimize. i.e.
Code Clinic 2015: How to Write Code the Compiler Can Actually Optimize
Ignoring optimization doesn't make it go away. That's how we end up with bloated crap where a user is forced to download a 50 MB file for a bloody printer driver.
A good Software Engineer knows how to do those things; however, it's hard to find any good Software Engineers. Software Engineering goes way way beyond those things too and it is extremely hard to find a good Software Engineer, especially since most programmers want to be about art instead of engineering.
...Microsoft will probably appeal the new Warrant based on legality issues with the CLOUD Act and how it impacts business, which will probably get severely limited or struck down by SCOTUS. Basically, CLOUD Act has to be judicially proven.
Microsoft is right that their initial issue is not moot due to the CLOUD Act, but the CLOUD Act has yet to be tested. The ultimate outcome will probably be the same though as if CLOUD Act had not passed and this had continued out to a resolution. It's just going to take longer to get there.
Why not? The first thing every Linux installation does is enable interoperability with Windows networking. Wanacry very quickly spreads to SMB shares. If they are writable then a remote client can happily encrypt your shit. Or if you want, https://www.samba.org/samba/se... gives you your own Linux special flavour of Wanacry.
Now yes the GP is a troll, and it most likely wasn't the case. But security is about dealing with the possible, and just running Linux doesn't make you immune from anything, especially not user stupidity.
I've actually stopped setting up Windows networking by default on my Linux systems, especially my servers. It's easier to install FileZilla or WinSCP on Windows.
Got the email, but couldn't find a reliable source to validate it.
I recevied the email, too. It contained details that only a bona fide vendor would have. It had the Amazon order number. It was sent to the email address I use for Amazon (please tell me you know better than to just have a single email address for everything). The product description matched my order history.
So yes, I was sure - to a level of certainty that outweighed the potential (very limited) "hack attack" probability and scope for damage.
The only worrying thing is that since I bought this in 2015, I have parted company with the power bank. I don't know where it is, or who has got it. Though I do still have the charger, so I guess / hope the device isn't being used by anyone.
I still haven't gotten any kind of response on its validity from Amazon; and Slashdot is sadly the most reliable source I've heard about the recall from.
However, Intel can't maintain itself on its current markets, as they are all shrinking in favor of Mobile and, to a lesser extent, Cloud.
Well Intel supplies an awful lot of those CPUs for the cloud so I don't think that worries them so much. Mobile is an issue for them because that is definitely where the growth is. The biggest threat to Intel is that they have so much of their revenue and profit tied up in the X86 platform. If software and PC makers continue to migrate away from X86 it's going to hurt Intel badly sooner or later.
Even Cloud providers are looking to move to a different platform and many are involved in OpenPower (https://openpowerfoundation.org/membership/current-members/) to find better hardware in terms of cost per watt for Cload loads where floating point or integer computational performance may not matter as much.
You are attaching too much importance to the iPhone CPUs (and Android) market. It is doubtful the margins are high on those, especially since Apple has multiple manufacturers. That is like saying Apple missed out on making Android phones because there were so many of them out there. You don't want to enter a cutthroat low-margin market.
Same process happened in the 1980's when Intel overtook the Mainframe market, and folks said the same thing.
Like it or not, laptops and (even more so) desktops are moving to areas of that generally require high performance stuff. As productivity (LibreOffice, MS Office, etc) and financial applications (Quicken) get better on mobile (Google Apps - Docs, Spreadsheet, Presentation; O365; Quicken is already on iOS and Android) then the need for even a laptop will go away entirely for the every-day-user will be able to 99% of things on a phone or tablet, and laptops and desktops will be left to specialized fields - CAD, A/V Editing and Production, etc - some of which is already starting to move to mobile platforms. (CAD will be among the last to truly go mobile, though viewers are already available so tablets can be used on the manufacturing floors.)
All said, time is *not* on Intel's side unless they figure out how to get back into the ARM market - a market they left shortly before the smart phone market took off.
Given the multiplier of $4000 hammers,no it is easier to end the empire and break up the army after 2 years
Like Article 1 of the Constitution DEMANDS!
Not quite. You're referring to Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 12 with respect to appropriations; however, paragraphs 9-13 stand in contrast to that - providing for the creation of navy and militia (army), training thereof, as well as buildings (forts), etc - none of which are limited to 2 years terms.
Now I would probably grant your argument over term durations...but then, budgets typically run year to year, even if a contract is over a longer period term it's still subject to budgeting every year, thereby getting around Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 12 since the appropriation doesn't last for more than 2 years, but separate appropriations are made.
Nor does the Constitution require that the army or navy be dissolved after 2 years time period. Rather, Congress can "raise and support armies" but is forbidden from the "appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years" which as I showed above Congress has figured out how to hold to the Constitution while maintaining the army. By a strict reading that wouldn't apply to the Navy (which is separately listed); nor would it apply to the Air Force (not listed at all - which means it's also not prohibited). Thus there are plenty of ways to get around it as a result.
Oh, I see, kill off citizens instead of $4,000 hammers
$19/does (Dateline and 20/20 news reports in the 1990's - 76,000% markup - $0.025 USD/dose at the *most* expensive end per Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., 2014 price) meet $4,00 hammer (445% markup, $9/hammer cheapest decent thing I could find on Amazon). Yeah - a lot easier to trim the excess from healthcare without compromising service than it is to cut from defense.
Not sure where you get the $1.11 Trillion for discretionary spending...but military was only $798 Billion for 2015. Military has yet to break the $1 Trillion mark; yet Healthcare did in 2015 ($1028.4) and Pensions was just shy ($953.6 Billion); "Pensions" seem to include Social Security.
Oh - I figured out the $1.11 Trillion - a misleading chart that pulls from various budget items and compares against select items. How'd I figure that out? The numbers don't match up against actual data...so be careful with your "nationalpriorities.org" usage.
Solving the Healthcare problem would do so much better than cutting defense - since Obama took office Healthcare went from $641.8 Billion (2007) to $1,130 Billion (2017). Defense however has only gone from $652.6 Billion (2007) to $832.1 Billion (2017). Yeah - ObamaCare (PPACA) did nothing but exasperate it as it had no real spending controls in it.
Or take federal government pensions - $636.1 Billion (2007) to $1006.1 Billion (2017).
And 3.3% more than we can afford, given the tax cuts and infrastructure crumbling thanks to Reagan tax cuts.
Funny... https://www.usgovernmentspendi... - there's many other areas where spending can be more easily cut...from discretionary/healthcare/pensions/education, and more...
When I did programming classes in high school the teacher used a book specific to each language we were taught. We didn't take them home; they stayed in the classroom. The books were most useful for assignments, but the reading material was good too. The teacher's background was Mathematics and teaching; and he did fairly well. But what he brought most to the table was outside the book - discipline as we were also graded on comments, explaining what it did, and more than just the basics of the assignments; even if the program didn't work or failed, you could still do okay if you could explain what you were doing and had it all commented.
So yes - a book and non-book materials go hand-in-hand.
And at that level you basically cannot be doing the language du jour - you have to stick with time honored languages to keep year-to-year work easy. The teacher does not have the time to rewrite the curriculum every 6 months for whatever new hotness is out there. So sticking with C++, Python, and a couple others that have been around for a very long time is much more preferable than trying to keep up with all the different JS frameworks (Node, React, etc) or whatever else is the latest fancy of the CS departments.
If a dev doesn't know about primary keys and foreign keys in a relational database, fire them on the spot. Dev should always look into simple solution, and manually managing data integrity is far from being easy.
Devs tend to do whatever is easiest, most convenient, and fits their personal style. Not many get beyond that.
And yes, I've seen the same kind of thing. In one case the database became a de facto standard for the industry it was in too, getting written into the official documentation even by clients for others. I really wanted to rip it apart and fix it b/c it was so badly designed from a DB point of view.
Their cars are not self driving. They are Level 2 automation, which means that the driver has to keep their hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road. It's basically unreliably auto-steering and reliable traffic-aware cruise control.
The early version didn't force the user to pay attention, and then that guy was killed and they made it more strict. If you go back and watch the original videos made about the feature on YouTube there are a lot of people not touching the wheel at all for minutes at a time.
Tesla is Level 2 approved; but I suspect they're using Level 3/4 tech to do it, and simply using a lower level approval to get the tech out there and tested.
Android Apps and Third-Party Auth Integrations that don't support 2FA...
Really...I enabled 2FA across my google accounts and had to disable it b/c I had too many things that didn't support the 2FA protocols. I still use the app password for Gmail though; it's still partially enabled in that respect. But until Android Apps and third-party auth integrations are forced to support it it won't go anywhere. I'd love to do so, especially using a FIDO/YubiKey solution; though again Android fails there as too many Android devices don't support the hardware tokens via USB, even with the dongles to hook them up.
Those numbers are completely absurd. Chrome + Safari alone is 70% of the browser market, and those both have built-in password managers.
So 58% of computer users don't know that they're already using a password manager.
Really?
TFA isn't talking about Password Managers but about 2-Factor Auth which is entirely different from using a Password Manager. A Password Manager is only good for storing one of the two factors; the second factor is dynamic and comes via YubiKey, soft-key (GAuthenticator), SMS/TXT, etc.
Just because my browser has a built-in password manager, doesn't mean I use it. I use Keepass instead, and I have no idea how Google would know that, so I wonder what the basis for their statistic is.
So Chrome doesn't necessarily use it's *built-in* password manager either. If the system provides one (e.g GNOME, KDE) then it will automatically use that; you can also configure it to use another one. I believe there are LastPass and KeePass extensions for Chrome to use them instead of the built-in supported ones too.
yeah, I use Slack; but I gave up on the Slack Desktop for Linux a while ago since SSO isn't integrated into anything else I use so it's just one more to login to that I could avoid by just using Slack in a browser. The Slack Desktop App is basically a browser dedicated to Slack any way; it doesn't do any special desktop integrations that Chrome/Firefox/etc don't already do. So it didn't add any real value.
What is a Snap, a new Docker competitor or something?
Snap (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snappy_(package_manager)) is one of several "universal" formats. It requires a specialized daemon (snapd) to run the Snap Apps. It kind of won out because Ubuntu created it (Ubuntu's famous NIH syndrome) and pushed it out in Ubuntu 16.04 IIRC thus giving it a larger market than any of the other solutions. The other big one was Flatpak (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak) which is very similar. Both deliver apps very much like Mac OS X does - all bound together in a big tarball.
Older efforts like Autopackage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopackage) are actually better in many respects as they don't bundle the whole thing; instead it creates a binary that requires linking to the local system during install - truly universal; unfortunately it never really caught on. Autopackage was the biggest of any of these kinds of solutions until Flatpak and Snap were created and started duking it out.
Slashdot Mirror
His 2nd go was awesome and Apple became a powerhouse. But his 1st go nearly killed Apple and he was tossed out.
So, which is he? Exceptional leader or value killing loser? He did both at various times.
Both - kind of. His first go round with Apple he took it to the top of the industry (Apple ][), got arrogant, and then got too far ahead of the market (Lisa), came back with the early Mac, but got kicked out for being hard to work with - he wasn't very personable to the Board Of Directors and others that he needed to cull favor with in order to keep the company. He left, created Next Computing, learned from his mistake, so when he returned (via Apple buying Next) he improved where it mattered to stay in control. He was a genius in tech and marketing - far more than Gates ever was - the whole time.
First, with respect to computers in general I wholeheartedly agree. Software Developers have become atrocious in their disregard for resources, and I lay that mostly at the hands of the rise of Computer Science which teaches towards the perfect computer (all RAM, CPU, storage, etc you need is there) as well as communities like Java where the motto is "just throw more hardware at it". Then you have the devs and managers that don't want to spend the time or resources to optimize the system - often going tossing out the idea of "premature optimization" in order to prioritize other things. All-in-all the software industry as a whole is just downright a disaster in this area and shows no sign of solving it any where in the next few decades.
Second, with respect the "16 GB Android phone" bit...this is more due to a change in the base Android OS and shifting to push stuff into the Google Play app store in response to phone manufacturers and telco's not keeping software up-to-date. What happened? Google wrote functionality for Android Devs that pushes requires features for one base (f.e Android SDK 24) into the app so it can run on older devices that have another base (f.e Android SDK 20). The result is app sizes bloat more and more over time - the app gets updated (f.e now requires Android SDK 28) so the layer grows; even though the app itself might not have changed much in size, the package overall jumps majorly in size. So you can't quite blame software devs on this one - it's more out of their control. If the telco's would push updates out faster and device manufacturers would actually maintain devices longer (f.e 2 yrs like they have said they would, especially Motorola) then this would be even less of an issue.
And honestly, I haven't seen 16GB as being sufficient for a very long time - even back in 2015 32GB was a far better choice.
The article you linked? You've completely read it wrong. Or you're lying.
I hear crap like yours from so many people. Who is disseminating this misinformation to you? And every time we investigate, it's so obviously wrong!
TFA:
It's still a well-known issue in the States. For example, when I lived in Michigan (Grand Rapids area) we had recycling ($4 fee per month too); found out later they collected it separately but it still was always just dumped into the landfill.
Not wrong, just shortsighted.
Yes, computer science stems from mathematics, but it emerged after, and in response to, the imvention of electronic computers.
You can do computer science without hardware, but there is no reason to. Without computers, "computer science" is just a collection of otherwise-unrelated math subfields.
Programming existed long before Computer Science existed and came out of the Electrical Engineering field - the Applied Sciences, before even the "electronic computer".
Computer Science came about as mathematicians got involved in the field *after* computer languages started sprouting up. EE's also have high training in math - oddly sometimes more than CS folks. As the theoretical side took hold it moved to the Math oriented folks and took hold in and grew out of the Math departments. CS didn't even exist until the last 1960's, wasn't official until sometime in the 1970's, and didn't really become popular until the 1990's.
Interestingly, the conversion of Computer Programming from being based in EE to being based in CS has also largely corresponded with decline of women participating in the overarching field. (Though one cannot say the transition caused such an effect.)
> Edsger W. Dijkstra ... in fact shouldn't, involve actual computers at all.
Computer Science is an applied science. .
Wrong. Compute Science is the theoretical side of programming, and very much behaves like it. It came out of the Mathematical departments. The Applied Science is Software Engineering, which most schools fail to teach at all. It's more akin to Computer Engineering but with a higher software focus.
Dijkstra was an idiot who thought that only theory should be taught.
* In theory performance shouldn't matter * In practice it does.
Implementation details do matter regardless of many fucking cluesless profs try to handwave them. For example, how do you sort your data when it fit into available RAM? There is a reason why Map Reduce was invented.
Focus solely on theory is the wrong approach. There are 3 types of optimizations that a programmer needs to understand.
1. Micro-optimization: Bit-Twiddling I.e. https://graphics.stanford.edu/...
2. Algorithmic Spending time to optimize a bubble sort is a complete waste of time when you could use mergesort, quicksort, etc.
3. Macro-optimization (or cache-orientated) aka (Data-Orientated Design) Techniques such as Memoization exist for a reason.
A good programmer learns HOW to optimize. i.e.
Code Clinic 2015: How to Write Code the Compiler Can Actually Optimize
Ignoring optimization doesn't make it go away. That's how we end up with bloated crap where a user is forced to download a 50 MB file for a bloody printer driver.
A good Software Engineer knows how to do those things; however, it's hard to find any good Software Engineers. Software Engineering goes way way beyond those things too and it is extremely hard to find a good Software Engineer, especially since most programmers want to be about art instead of engineering.
...Microsoft will probably appeal the new Warrant based on legality issues with the CLOUD Act and how it impacts business, which will probably get severely limited or struck down by SCOTUS. Basically, CLOUD Act has to be judicially proven.
Microsoft is right that their initial issue is not moot due to the CLOUD Act, but the CLOUD Act has yet to be tested. The ultimate outcome will probably be the same though as if CLOUD Act had not passed and this had continued out to a resolution. It's just going to take longer to get there.
Why not? The first thing every Linux installation does is enable interoperability with Windows networking. Wanacry very quickly spreads to SMB shares. If they are writable then a remote client can happily encrypt your shit. Or if you want, https://www.samba.org/samba/se... gives you your own Linux special flavour of Wanacry.
Now yes the GP is a troll, and it most likely wasn't the case. But security is about dealing with the possible, and just running Linux doesn't make you immune from anything, especially not user stupidity.
I've actually stopped setting up Windows networking by default on my Linux systems, especially my servers. It's easier to install FileZilla or WinSCP on Windows.
Oh, and no - it didn't have anything other than the models affected and a phone number to call. Nothing verifiable.
Got the email, but couldn't find a reliable source to validate it.
I recevied the email, too. It contained details that only a bona fide vendor would have. It had the Amazon order number. It was sent to the email address I use for Amazon (please tell me you know better than to just have a single email address for everything). The product description matched my order history.
So yes, I was sure - to a level of certainty that outweighed the potential (very limited) "hack attack" probability and scope for damage.
The only worrying thing is that since I bought this in 2015, I have parted company with the power bank. I don't know where it is, or who has got it. Though I do still have the charger, so I guess / hope the device isn't being used by anyone.
I still haven't gotten any kind of response on its validity from Amazon; and Slashdot is sadly the most reliable source I've heard about the recall from.
However, Intel can't maintain itself on its current markets, as they are all shrinking in favor of Mobile and, to a lesser extent, Cloud.
Well Intel supplies an awful lot of those CPUs for the cloud so I don't think that worries them so much. Mobile is an issue for them because that is definitely where the growth is. The biggest threat to Intel is that they have so much of their revenue and profit tied up in the X86 platform. If software and PC makers continue to migrate away from X86 it's going to hurt Intel badly sooner or later.
Even Cloud providers are looking to move to a different platform and many are involved in OpenPower (https://openpowerfoundation.org/membership/current-members/) to find better hardware in terms of cost per watt for Cload loads where floating point or integer computational performance may not matter as much.
You are attaching too much importance to the iPhone CPUs (and Android) market. It is doubtful the margins are high on those, especially since Apple has multiple manufacturers. That is like saying Apple missed out on making Android phones because there were so many of them out there. You don't want to enter a cutthroat low-margin market.
Same process happened in the 1980's when Intel overtook the Mainframe market, and folks said the same thing. Like it or not, laptops and (even more so) desktops are moving to areas of that generally require high performance stuff. As productivity (LibreOffice, MS Office, etc) and financial applications (Quicken) get better on mobile (Google Apps - Docs, Spreadsheet, Presentation; O365; Quicken is already on iOS and Android) then the need for even a laptop will go away entirely for the every-day-user will be able to 99% of things on a phone or tablet, and laptops and desktops will be left to specialized fields - CAD, A/V Editing and Production, etc - some of which is already starting to move to mobile platforms. (CAD will be among the last to truly go mobile, though viewers are already available so tablets can be used on the manufacturing floors.)
All said, time is *not* on Intel's side unless they figure out how to get back into the ARM market - a market they left shortly before the smart phone market took off.
Hardly, I find plenty to watch and have a hard time lowering my backlog of things to watch - it tends to keep growing.
That said, yeah - there's fewer movies, but it's hardly noticeable though.
As far as TV-series goes, really wish they'd bring all of Star Hunter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starhunter) back.
Given the multiplier of $4000 hammers,no it is easier to end the empire and break up the army after 2 years Like Article 1 of the Constitution DEMANDS!
Not quite. You're referring to Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 12 with respect to appropriations; however, paragraphs 9-13 stand in contrast to that - providing for the creation of navy and militia (army), training thereof, as well as buildings (forts), etc - none of which are limited to 2 years terms.
Now I would probably grant your argument over term durations...but then, budgets typically run year to year, even if a contract is over a longer period term it's still subject to budgeting every year, thereby getting around Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 12 since the appropriation doesn't last for more than 2 years, but separate appropriations are made.
Nor does the Constitution require that the army or navy be dissolved after 2 years time period. Rather, Congress can "raise and support armies" but is forbidden from the "appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years" which as I showed above Congress has figured out how to hold to the Constitution while maintaining the army. By a strict reading that wouldn't apply to the Navy (which is separately listed); nor would it apply to the Air Force (not listed at all - which means it's also not prohibited). Thus there are plenty of ways to get around it as a result.
Oh, I see, kill off citizens instead of $4,000 hammers
$19/does (Dateline and 20/20 news reports in the 1990's - 76,000% markup - $0.025 USD/dose at the *most* expensive end per Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., 2014 price) meet $4,00 hammer (445% markup, $9/hammer cheapest decent thing I could find on Amazon). Yeah - a lot easier to trim the excess from healthcare without compromising service than it is to cut from defense.
hmm...some real numbers - https://www.usgovernmentspendi...
Not sure where you get the $1.11 Trillion for discretionary spending...but military was only $798 Billion for 2015. Military has yet to break the $1 Trillion mark; yet Healthcare did in 2015 ($1028.4) and Pensions was just shy ($953.6 Billion); "Pensions" seem to include Social Security.
Oh - I figured out the $1.11 Trillion - a misleading chart that pulls from various budget items and compares against select items. How'd I figure that out? The numbers don't match up against actual data...so be careful with your "nationalpriorities.org" usage.
Here's some real numbers for you - https://www.usgovernmentspendi...
Solving the Healthcare problem would do so much better than cutting defense - since Obama took office Healthcare went from $641.8 Billion (2007) to $1,130 Billion (2017). Defense however has only gone from $652.6 Billion (2007) to $832.1 Billion (2017). Yeah - ObamaCare (PPACA) did nothing but exasperate it as it had no real spending controls in it.
Or take federal government pensions - $636.1 Billion (2007) to $1006.1 Billion (2017).
The US defense budget is 3.3% of US GDP
And 3.3% more than we can afford, given the tax cuts and infrastructure crumbling thanks to Reagan tax cuts.
Funny... https://www.usgovernmentspendi... - there's many other areas where spending can be more easily cut...from discretionary/healthcare/pensions/education, and more...
I'd highly suggest some kind of book.
When I did programming classes in high school the teacher used a book specific to each language we were taught. We didn't take them home; they stayed in the classroom. The books were most useful for assignments, but the reading material was good too. The teacher's background was Mathematics and teaching; and he did fairly well. But what he brought most to the table was outside the book - discipline as we were also graded on comments, explaining what it did, and more than just the basics of the assignments; even if the program didn't work or failed, you could still do okay if you could explain what you were doing and had it all commented.
So yes - a book and non-book materials go hand-in-hand.
And at that level you basically cannot be doing the language du jour - you have to stick with time honored languages to keep year-to-year work easy. The teacher does not have the time to rewrite the curriculum every 6 months for whatever new hotness is out there. So sticking with C++, Python, and a couple others that have been around for a very long time is much more preferable than trying to keep up with all the different JS frameworks (Node, React, etc) or whatever else is the latest fancy of the CS departments.
If a dev doesn't know about primary keys and foreign keys in a relational database, fire them on the spot. Dev should always look into simple solution, and manually managing data integrity is far from being easy.
Devs tend to do whatever is easiest, most convenient, and fits their personal style. Not many get beyond that.
And yes, I've seen the same kind of thing. In one case the database became a de facto standard for the industry it was in too, getting written into the official documentation even by clients for others. I really wanted to rip it apart and fix it b/c it was so badly designed from a DB point of view.
Their cars are not self driving. They are Level 2 automation, which means that the driver has to keep their hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road. It's basically unreliably auto-steering and reliable traffic-aware cruise control.
The early version didn't force the user to pay attention, and then that guy was killed and they made it more strict. If you go back and watch the original videos made about the feature on YouTube there are a lot of people not touching the wheel at all for minutes at a time.
Tesla is Level 2 approved; but I suspect they're using Level 3/4 tech to do it, and simply using a lower level approval to get the tech out there and tested.
Android Apps and Third-Party Auth Integrations that don't support 2FA...
Really...I enabled 2FA across my google accounts and had to disable it b/c I had too many things that didn't support the 2FA protocols. I still use the app password for Gmail though; it's still partially enabled in that respect. But until Android Apps and third-party auth integrations are forced to support it it won't go anywhere. I'd love to do so, especially using a FIDO/YubiKey solution; though again Android fails there as too many Android devices don't support the hardware tokens via USB, even with the dongles to hook them up.
Those numbers are completely absurd. Chrome + Safari alone is 70% of the browser market, and those both have built-in password managers.
So 58% of computer users don't know that they're already using a password manager.
Really?
TFA isn't talking about Password Managers but about 2-Factor Auth which is entirely different from using a Password Manager. A Password Manager is only good for storing one of the two factors; the second factor is dynamic and comes via YubiKey, soft-key (GAuthenticator), SMS/TXT, etc.
Just because my browser has a built-in password manager, doesn't mean I use it. I use Keepass instead, and I have no idea how Google would know that, so I wonder what the basis for their statistic is.
So Chrome doesn't necessarily use it's *built-in* password manager either. If the system provides one (e.g GNOME, KDE) then it will automatically use that; you can also configure it to use another one. I believe there are LastPass and KeePass extensions for Chrome to use them instead of the built-in supported ones too.
yeah, I use Slack; but I gave up on the Slack Desktop for Linux a while ago since SSO isn't integrated into anything else I use so it's just one more to login to that I could avoid by just using Slack in a browser. The Slack Desktop App is basically a browser dedicated to Slack any way; it doesn't do any special desktop integrations that Chrome/Firefox/etc don't already do. So it didn't add any real value.
What is a Snap, a new Docker competitor or something?
Snap (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snappy_(package_manager)) is one of several "universal" formats. It requires a specialized daemon (snapd) to run the Snap Apps. It kind of won out because Ubuntu created it (Ubuntu's famous NIH syndrome) and pushed it out in Ubuntu 16.04 IIRC thus giving it a larger market than any of the other solutions. The other big one was Flatpak (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak) which is very similar. Both deliver apps very much like Mac OS X does - all bound together in a big tarball.
Older efforts like Autopackage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopackage) are actually better in many respects as they don't bundle the whole thing; instead it creates a binary that requires linking to the local system during install - truly universal; unfortunately it never really caught on. Autopackage was the biggest of any of these kinds of solutions until Flatpak and Snap were created and started duking it out.