The funny thing is everyone knows that the plane went down in the ocean but don't know where exactly.
Everyone except those that look at the alternate interpretations of the same data.
Again, if the data analysis had actually led to something that would be one thing; but it hasn't. There's still only a high likelihood that MH370 ended in the Indian Ocean. And yes - I'm aware of the components found; consider that if if it went on the Northern Arc (again - a path predicted by the data) that it would have been in the interest of parties to make it look like it went on the Southern Arc by giving some evidence. Conspiratorial? Yes; but until the plane is actually found we have to consider all possibilities that fit the findings.
Even if it were a matter of regular maintenance it would - best case - be negligent. As soon as they got sued it became legally relevant and your maintenance schedule needs to be delayed.
But it's certainly suspiciously bad timing. They were sued because the system was too old and badly maintained and secured. So maintenance wasn't a high priority for many years and now suddenly they wipe it?
Certainly worth investigating.
While I agree timing is supsicious - it's possible that the legal council hasn't yet been able to fully notify everyone to protect stuff. Yes - that should have been high priority, but it happens. If someone doesn't get the notice and follows through on a normal maintenance (6 months after the election) then things happen.
So until more info is out, I wouldn't read too much into it.
For 35-year-olds, what amount of experience will matter? If the woman took off three years for childbearing, that's 12 years rather than 15, and that's pretty much meaningless. As far as hours go, isn't it more important who gets more done? In any sort of intellectual field, working 10 hours a day won't necessarily produce more than 8 hours a day, but it will often be rewarded with higher pay for the one who can't manage time well as opposed to one who gets her job done efficiently.
Correct - it is complicated. But if you're 35 and you just switched fields, then you're still an entry level person and you *should not* be making the same as a senior level person. So really, it doesn't matter *why* the experience level is different; it just matters that it *is* different *regardless* of age.
As to someone working 10 hour days vs 6-8 hour days...well, that'll vary from org to org, manager to manager and typically comes down to how well they think you're doing the job. But yes - it is complicated, and that's the problem with all the different groups claiming to find a real sex-based pay gap. They use simplistic models like you just used - saying "if you're 35 you should get paid X" without looking at all the complications; and those that do try to adjust for some of the complications ignore many others because they want to prove a political point instead of determining the reality.
Oh, and pretty much every employer - especially large employers - are pushed to have all people (regardless of age, sex, etc) at a given position level to be within a certain spread. If you're in the upper end of the spread, then HR pushes for a promotion so they can keep the numbers relatively close together. If you're at the bottom of the spread, then HR pushes for pay raises. Essentially, the position might have a spread of $20k, but HR pushes to keep folks within $5-10k of each other.
But that brings about a problem. They force their good people out of what they're good at and into something like management because they exceed the salary range. This leads to their top talent leaving the company because not everyone wants to climb the corporate ladder or become management.
Sometimes an engineer just wants to be an engineer.
Yes, very true unless companies create a path for people to remain technical while still advancing. But it still puts in place a glass ceiling.
After you account for everything there is still a gap. It's smaller than the uncontrolled gap of course, but it's still a significant gap. Headline figure is 2.4%, which is equivalent to working nearly 9 days a year for free, and it's worse in some industries.
Note however that the controlled gap, comparing like-for-like in terms of experience, time worked, age, education, children etc. doesn't tell the whole story. For women there is less opportunity to reach that same level and then get paid 2.4% less. Not just women either, it can affect men who are in some groups such as those with disabilities or who are widowed.
And yet you still fail to account for how individuals negotiate their priorities, etc. Some take lower pay on purpose in trade-off for other benefits - this is extremely true of many women, especially those that have children, and the others in the group you mentioned (those with disabilities or caring for someone elderly or with disabilities). As I said - once you take *all* the factors into play, there is *no* pay gap, or at least not one that is statistically significant.
Also, a 2.4% difference would fall within normative ranges deltas, and can be accounted for numerous things - from work-life balance to performance, etc.
As to opportunities - it's a matter of what you make of it. I've transitioned from being "at the office" to WFH. The opportunities for advancement have significantly changed as a result; yet it's a matter of what I do - how I engage, etc - both within my team, and within the company as a whole that makes the difference in advancement opportunities.
Is there a theoretical gap in pay? Yes. However, when you look at the real numbers, it's quickly shown that the difference is because there is also a difference is time actually worked - IOW - a difference in experience levels, and once adjusted for that the gap goes away to within the normative ranges.
So yes, if you look at a man and a woman who are both 35 years old and say "oh, there's a $20k difference in their pay", but then...
- failed to account for work experience differences
- failed to account for time-off differences
Oh, and pretty much every employer - especially large employers - are pushed to have all people (regardless of age, sex, etc) at a given position level to be within a certain spread. If you're in the upper end of the spread, then HR pushes for a promotion so they can keep the numbers relatively close together. If you're at the bottom of the spread, then HR pushes for pay raises. Essentially, the position might have a spread of $20k, but HR pushes to keep folks within $5-10k of each other.
Still thing there's a gender pay gap? Take a look at the demographics of HR departments (it's highly skewed - opposite the general tech field).
You'd be surprised how ignorant some people, including IT professionals, can be. I was recently talking to one Linux sysadmin who absolutely hated Windows. Yet the last time he'd used Windows was NT 4! He couldn't even name any Windows Server releases past 2000! He also had no idea what SQL Server is, and although he had heard of C# he knew pretty much nothing about.NET. He was a pretty stereotypical neckbeard, so I can understand him not using Windows often, but it was absurd to see him hate Windows so much despite not having used it in over 15 years! I think this blind, ignorant hatred is far more prevalent within the Linux community than we might expect. I find it kind of ironic, as Linux has been becoming far more Windows-like with things like systemd and binary logging. These Linux supporters are advocating for what they claim to hate, without even realizing it!
1. systemd is an abomination that should be removed entirely. Glad there's distros like Devuan focused on keeping options open; and Gentoo driving OpenRC development (which started at Gentoo!).
2. I stopped using Windows regularly in 2009 once I was able to switch my work devices over to Linux, save a VM to do deliverable compilations on occasion for a couple years. However, I still get introduced to the changes going on - via co-workers, friends, and family. That said, the basics of Windows haven't changed since the NT4 days. Win32 is just as abysmally insecure as ever. I've done some.NET (VB.NET + ASP.NET; C# + managed C++ for a service), and touched quite a few Windows technologies over the years and done enough in-depth Windows stuff to know why I avoid Windows - all of which applies equally to NT4 and WIn10.
So yeah - a dev might not be able to explain how to use the interface on Win10, or name off all the releases...but their concerns about Windows are still probably just as valid.
Before you rush to post about how insecure Microsoft is, don't forget that your social security number and financial history were released in a hack of Linux / Apache / Struts.
Funny thing this wasn't a windows hack. FTA: "The group, variously called Morpho, Butterfly and Wild Neutron by security researchers elsewhere, exploited a flaw in the Java programming language to penetrate employees' Apple Macintosh computers and then move to company networks"
Hypothesis: The hack was ordered by the SSA trying to discredit the use of social security numbers as financial credentials, so they could push the government to adopt cryptographically secure credentials for individuals.
SSA could care less about the SSN in that respect. It'd more likely be the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, and a number of other agencies that have more of an interest with collecting all that information...
So, Gmail has had this ability for quite a while since you can lock your Google Account to a 2FA device, or even to Google Authenticator codes as a 2FA tool. However, the biggest issue is Apps on Android not being able to use the more secure authentication mechanisms.
Yeah - I turned it on over a year ago. Thunderbird uses 2FA to access my Google Account (via their App Passwords); but for normal logics I still have to keep it at just Passwords b/c too many apps - even by big app providers - don't support using your Google Account in the more secure modes. IIRC even Google's own PlayStore might have been problematic.
The intelligent argument is not that the government should be in charge of health care, but that the government should be the single-payer for health care.
Wrong. The intelligent person asks why do we need to have health insurance to start with and solves that problem. Reduce the costs for all regardless of insurance coverage.
Also, the intelligent person realizes that government only adds bureaucracy and overhead to the cost of anything it provides. It does not improve it; rather it makes any changes take longer and longer.
There are very few things government can do well - military is one of them.
...honestly, I keep BT off most of the time unless I really need to use it as that saves the battery power. Not to mention there's a nice little hack going around that's enabled via BT.
....when they stopped allowing 3rd party applications (e.g Pidgin) to connect (yes, they actively started doing that) they pushed away the last remaining users.
I've had Pidgin on/off my 3 accounts over the last 15+ years. Haven't touched AOL's actual software in longer than that. Oh well...FB, G+/Hangouts and IRC FTW.
(I'd say Skype to...but I can't get into my Skype account since Microsoft linked it to their accounts...)
But it's not unprecedented in industry. Most HMIs run Windows now because operators are far more familiar with Windows than any other windowing system. Truly that was not the case originally Unix was used before Windows but not anymore.
(not retail Windows mind you, it's quite a bit different in terms of being hardened and fool proof - but still Windows)
Honestly there is enough training, etc going on for the military that whether you use Linux, Windows, Unix, or something else entirely - basic familiarity isn't an issue. You don't just get tossed into the position. Now in a WWI/WWII conflict where you're having to draft massive numbers of people that might be a different issue - but given the state of the US military that's not likely going to be an issue should WWIII come along.
The question is, will it shatter when the ship gets hit by a shock wave that does not kill the crew?
The controllers aren't indestructable but they're pretty good, (remember the old atari joysticks?)
As long they've got a spare or 2 in the original packaging stashed nearby, does it even matter?
I just find it more interesting that they're going with the older xbox 360 over the newer xbox one controllers.
yes it does. If you've been hit by a shockwave, torpedo, etc - you don't have time to pull something out of a box and replace a controller - you need it to continue functioning; not to mention you now have junk you have to take care of - you don't want it becoming shrapnel or other hazard in the *next* shockwave.
Why? Why invest that much effort into the controller? The position indicator would be the friggin' pole coming up through the floor. Want more price level indicators? Put a tape measure on the side of the the pole. All the controller does is make the pole go up when you push up and go around when you push to the side. What would be accomplished by investing hundreds of thousands in R&D for a what amounts to a toggle switch?
Reliability and safety. I doubt we want the operator choking on a chord; nor do we want the thing to fail at the wrong moment. Submarines deal with life-and-death situations during wartime - a fraction of a second and you might miss the signs of a torpedo or something else coming at you and now you have a major issue on hand.
So no, "the pull it out, toss it, and put a new one in" isn't a solution when ever second counts.
You can just "fix it in software" the same way you can fix a mouse with a post-it over the sensor in software: you can't.
You can fix the problem of sensor smoothing in software, and you can fix the problem of sensor failure with redundancy. So yes, you can effectively fix the problem in software.
Not necessarily - it all depends on your use-case. For the periscope...may be.
I've done optical encoders before, and we had an expensive part that received the signal - could take 4 of them - made by GE. The part was something like $1k; however, in certain scenarios when 2 were plugged in, the part would hiccup and we'd get a bad read where 1 of 3 bytes (for a 24-bit value) would be for the *next* read not the current read. However, the system was sensitive enough that this was a *big* problem. My only solution was to replace the expensive board - oddly enough an Arduino Mega ($60) with Robogaia hat ($35) solved the issue - in part b/c we also eliminated a whole other part of the system so timing was easier to control, and were actually dealing directly with the chipset to read it.
So no, software does not and cannot fix all things - and suggesting to do so is a dumb cop-out. There are places for software fixes; but there's at least as many for proper hardware fixes with better hardware. Software can only do as much as the hardware allows it and cannot be used to solve for bad hardware.
If you haven't already, go read the article, the summary doesn't do it justice.
I'm guessing you are a mobile phone user, so you may not notice this, but mobile phone users are nowadays continually trying to force mobile phone users on the few remaining people who don't want one.
I see this in my private life a lot. Some people straight-up try to use their influence over others, e.g. parents or bosses pushing a mobile on their kids or employees; some try to use social coercion, e.g. pushing people without a mobile more and more towards their out-crowd; some passive aggressively require phone use, e.g. people meeting up in a restaurant texting each other a change of venue at the last minute, leaving people without a mobile on them stranded.
Some of my friends now have a mobile, even though they hate the thing. And before you tell them to just turn it off, go over the social coercion used to get them to get one and you'll notice that it has to be on. And even when off, the thing still drains your bank account.
I've explained to them that they don't have to get a mobile on my account, that I'd accept them for what they are and would accommodate them, but although they were grateful they said most people just aren't very nice in this respect and they didn't want to throw most of their social life out of the window.
Very very true - especially if you have kids. Schools use them; babysitters use them; any child care facility uses them - all to text you. Very few use email as primary means of comms, especially in quick scenarios (e.g come get your kid - they got sick).
Not really true. I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.
We didn't have data/text on our phones for years; finally had to add it after we had kids. All the orgs that focus on children (child care facilities, schools, church programs, etc) and babysitters basically expect that you have at least text capabilities and use that as their primary means of communications, especially if you kid is getting sick, etc.
TFS says "With the national jobless rate near a 16-year low" - which means there's a shortage of people overall. If the IT tech suffers from that, raise salaries, you say. OK, then the shortage moves around from one job area to another, but the fact remains: someone, somewhere, would end up having to outsource.
Well, TFS is wrong about the jobless rate being near a 16-year low b/c it's incorrectly calculated. We're still not generating enough jobs month-to-month (even with the improvement since the elections last November) to bring down the unemployment rate; so the calculated rate is crap b/c it's ignoring all the people that left the job market b/c the job market sucked and still generally does. Once you account for the labor participation rate being near a 50 year low, the unemployment rate ends up being near a 50 year high (though lower than what it was about a year ago - participation rate did nothing but drop under Obama which is why the unemployment rate dropped too).
That all depends on where you live. $90k doesn't go very far in the NYC area. Making $90k in SC OTOH makes it go very far; $90k in SC is $140k in NYC according to the various Cost of Living Calculators (last I checked).
Unfortunately, it's far easier to destroy and harm than it is to create and improve... I doubt there are many among us who haven't derived some kind of pleasure from breaking something at some point in their lives.
This does not, however, mean we should not try. Also no reason to completely write off the dark-side folks, sometimes they see the light and come around.
Lol....there are two very distinct mindsets - those that create, and those that destroy. Programmers/Engineers are good at the creating mindset while black/white hats are good at the destruction mindsets. It's usually hard for someone of one mindset to switch to the other - not impossible, but hard to do. And honestly we need both mindsets - which is really what Torvalds is gunning for; because if you only have people that know how to create something then it will be full of security holes.
...Amazon participated in the TV show Undercover Boss a few years back, and one of the days Bezos had to do the package loading job - running all over a warehouse floor. I wonder if the robots are the result of that?
I'm the same. TabGroups is very hard for me to live without.
Did you find anything usable for Chrome? I'm trying out TabsFolder currently, but the inability to move tabs around between existing groups is making it barely useful for me.
I have not. Nothing provides the same kind of functionality. Best I found in Chrome is Chrome's native "pin" tab functionality, but then the window gets overloaded with tabs very easy and there's no easy means (like with TabGroups) to switch to a tab. TabGroup's tab manager and the fact that each group is loaded/unloaded are really the keys to the success of TabGroups. About the only way to improve TabGroups is to manage multiple windows enabling multiple groups to be loaded simultaneously.
I use TabGroups to context-switch between different work projects, different personal research projects, etc. It makes my work day SO MUCH easier to handle.
I'd be open to totally different approaches to my problem - how to stop using a bunch of websites, easily switch to doing something different, and easily switch back later. And move things from one group/context/session/whatever to another. It doesn't have to look or feel like TabGroups as long as I can switch contexts relatively efficiently. It doesn't necessarily have to preserve per-tab history, though that is sometimes convenient.
I do the same kind of thing. Each tab group is a context/activity. The same URL might be opened in a few different tab groups. Works wonders to keep me down to a single window, and keep things well organized.
Also, Firefox's native "don't load tab until clicked" is far superior to the extension in Chrome that enables the same thing.
Slashdot Mirror
The funny thing is everyone knows that the plane went down in the ocean but don't know where exactly.
Everyone except those that look at the alternate interpretations of the same data.
Again, if the data analysis had actually led to something that would be one thing; but it hasn't. There's still only a high likelihood that MH370 ended in the Indian Ocean. And yes - I'm aware of the components found; consider that if if it went on the Northern Arc (again - a path predicted by the data) that it would have been in the interest of parties to make it look like it went on the Southern Arc by giving some evidence. Conspiratorial? Yes; but until the plane is actually found we have to consider all possibilities that fit the findings.
Even if it were a matter of regular maintenance it would - best case - be negligent. As soon as they got sued it became legally relevant and your maintenance schedule needs to be delayed.
But it's certainly suspiciously bad timing. They were sued because the system was too old and badly maintained and secured. So maintenance wasn't a high priority for many years and now suddenly they wipe it? Certainly worth investigating.
While I agree timing is supsicious - it's possible that the legal council hasn't yet been able to fully notify everyone to protect stuff. Yes - that should have been high priority, but it happens. If someone doesn't get the notice and follows through on a normal maintenance (6 months after the election) then things happen.
So until more info is out, I wouldn't read too much into it.
For 35-year-olds, what amount of experience will matter? If the woman took off three years for childbearing, that's 12 years rather than 15, and that's pretty much meaningless. As far as hours go, isn't it more important who gets more done? In any sort of intellectual field, working 10 hours a day won't necessarily produce more than 8 hours a day, but it will often be rewarded with higher pay for the one who can't manage time well as opposed to one who gets her job done efficiently.
Correct - it is complicated. But if you're 35 and you just switched fields, then you're still an entry level person and you *should not* be making the same as a senior level person. So really, it doesn't matter *why* the experience level is different; it just matters that it *is* different *regardless* of age.
As to someone working 10 hour days vs 6-8 hour days...well, that'll vary from org to org, manager to manager and typically comes down to how well they think you're doing the job. But yes - it is complicated, and that's the problem with all the different groups claiming to find a real sex-based pay gap. They use simplistic models like you just used - saying "if you're 35 you should get paid X" without looking at all the complications; and those that do try to adjust for some of the complications ignore many others because they want to prove a political point instead of determining the reality.
Oh, and pretty much every employer - especially large employers - are pushed to have all people (regardless of age, sex, etc) at a given position level to be within a certain spread. If you're in the upper end of the spread, then HR pushes for a promotion so they can keep the numbers relatively close together. If you're at the bottom of the spread, then HR pushes for pay raises. Essentially, the position might have a spread of $20k, but HR pushes to keep folks within $5-10k of each other.
But that brings about a problem. They force their good people out of what they're good at and into something like management because they exceed the salary range. This leads to their top talent leaving the company because not everyone wants to climb the corporate ladder or become management.
Sometimes an engineer just wants to be an engineer.
Yes, very true unless companies create a path for people to remain technical while still advancing. But it still puts in place a glass ceiling.
After you account for everything there is still a gap. It's smaller than the uncontrolled gap of course, but it's still a significant gap. Headline figure is 2.4%, which is equivalent to working nearly 9 days a year for free, and it's worse in some industries.
Detailed analysis: https://www.payscale.com/data-...
Q/A session that probably anticipates most of your rebuttals: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/...
Note however that the controlled gap, comparing like-for-like in terms of experience, time worked, age, education, children etc. doesn't tell the whole story. For women there is less opportunity to reach that same level and then get paid 2.4% less. Not just women either, it can affect men who are in some groups such as those with disabilities or who are widowed.
And yet you still fail to account for how individuals negotiate their priorities, etc. Some take lower pay on purpose in trade-off for other benefits - this is extremely true of many women, especially those that have children, and the others in the group you mentioned (those with disabilities or caring for someone elderly or with disabilities). As I said - once you take *all* the factors into play, there is *no* pay gap, or at least not one that is statistically significant.
Also, a 2.4% difference would fall within normative ranges deltas, and can be accounted for numerous things - from work-life balance to performance, etc.
As to opportunities - it's a matter of what you make of it. I've transitioned from being "at the office" to WFH. The opportunities for advancement have significantly changed as a result; yet it's a matter of what I do - how I engage, etc - both within my team, and within the company as a whole that makes the difference in advancement opportunities.
...die together - when the whole thing collapses
Is there a theoretical gap in pay? Yes. However, when you look at the real numbers, it's quickly shown that the difference is because there is also a difference is time actually worked - IOW - a difference in experience levels, and once adjusted for that the gap goes away to within the normative ranges.
So yes, if you look at a man and a woman who are both 35 years old and say "oh, there's a $20k difference in their pay", but then...
- failed to account for work experience differences
- failed to account for time-off differences
Oh, and pretty much every employer - especially large employers - are pushed to have all people (regardless of age, sex, etc) at a given position level to be within a certain spread. If you're in the upper end of the spread, then HR pushes for a promotion so they can keep the numbers relatively close together. If you're at the bottom of the spread, then HR pushes for pay raises. Essentially, the position might have a spread of $20k, but HR pushes to keep folks within $5-10k of each other.
Still thing there's a gender pay gap? Take a look at the demographics of HR departments (it's highly skewed - opposite the general tech field).
Ah, but this is Microsoft...the only product they could build that wouldn’t suck is a sexbot.
didn't they have to turn that bot off?
You'd be surprised how ignorant some people, including IT professionals, can be. I was recently talking to one Linux sysadmin who absolutely hated Windows. Yet the last time he'd used Windows was NT 4! He couldn't even name any Windows Server releases past 2000! He also had no idea what SQL Server is, and although he had heard of C# he knew pretty much nothing about .NET. He was a pretty stereotypical neckbeard, so I can understand him not using Windows often, but it was absurd to see him hate Windows so much despite not having used it in over 15 years! I think this blind, ignorant hatred is far more prevalent within the Linux community than we might expect. I find it kind of ironic, as Linux has been becoming far more Windows-like with things like systemd and binary logging. These Linux supporters are advocating for what they claim to hate, without even realizing it!
1. systemd is an abomination that should be removed entirely. Glad there's distros like Devuan focused on keeping options open; and Gentoo driving OpenRC development (which started at Gentoo!).
.NET (VB.NET + ASP.NET; C# + managed C++ for a service), and touched quite a few Windows technologies over the years and done enough in-depth Windows stuff to know why I avoid Windows - all of which applies equally to NT4 and WIn10.
2. I stopped using Windows regularly in 2009 once I was able to switch my work devices over to Linux, save a VM to do deliverable compilations on occasion for a couple years. However, I still get introduced to the changes going on - via co-workers, friends, and family. That said, the basics of Windows haven't changed since the NT4 days. Win32 is just as abysmally insecure as ever. I've done some
So yeah - a dev might not be able to explain how to use the interface on Win10, or name off all the releases...but their concerns about Windows are still probably just as valid.
Before you rush to post about how insecure Microsoft is, don't forget that your social security number and financial history were released in a hack of Linux / Apache / Struts.
Funny thing this wasn't a windows hack. FTA: "The group, variously called Morpho, Butterfly and Wild Neutron by security researchers elsewhere, exploited a flaw in the Java programming language to penetrate employees' Apple Macintosh computers and then move to company networks"
Hypothesis: The hack was ordered by the SSA trying to discredit the use of social security numbers as financial credentials, so they could push the government to adopt cryptographically secure credentials for individuals.
SSA could care less about the SSN in that respect. It'd more likely be the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, and a number of other agencies that have more of an interest with collecting all that information...
So, Gmail has had this ability for quite a while since you can lock your Google Account to a 2FA device, or even to Google Authenticator codes as a 2FA tool. However, the biggest issue is Apps on Android not being able to use the more secure authentication mechanisms.
Yeah - I turned it on over a year ago. Thunderbird uses 2FA to access my Google Account (via their App Passwords); but for normal logics I still have to keep it at just Passwords b/c too many apps - even by big app providers - don't support using your Google Account in the more secure modes. IIRC even Google's own PlayStore might have been problematic.
The intelligent argument is not that the government should be in charge of health care, but that the government should be the single-payer for health care.
Wrong. The intelligent person asks why do we need to have health insurance to start with and solves that problem. Reduce the costs for all regardless of insurance coverage.
Also, the intelligent person realizes that government only adds bureaucracy and overhead to the cost of anything it provides. It does not improve it; rather it makes any changes take longer and longer.
There are very few things government can do well - military is one of them.
...honestly, I keep BT off most of the time unless I really need to use it as that saves the battery power. Not to mention there's a nice little hack going around that's enabled via BT.
I'll keep my wired, 1/8" jack than you.
....when they stopped allowing 3rd party applications (e.g Pidgin) to connect (yes, they actively started doing that) they pushed away the last remaining users.
I've had Pidgin on/off my 3 accounts over the last 15+ years. Haven't touched AOL's actual software in longer than that. Oh well...FB, G+/Hangouts and IRC FTW.
(I'd say Skype to...but I can't get into my Skype account since Microsoft linked it to their accounts...)
But it's not unprecedented in industry. Most HMIs run Windows now because operators are far more familiar with Windows than any other windowing system. Truly that was not the case originally Unix was used before Windows but not anymore.
(not retail Windows mind you, it's quite a bit different in terms of being hardened and fool proof - but still Windows)
Honestly there is enough training, etc going on for the military that whether you use Linux, Windows, Unix, or something else entirely - basic familiarity isn't an issue. You don't just get tossed into the position. Now in a WWI/WWII conflict where you're having to draft massive numbers of people that might be a different issue - but given the state of the US military that's not likely going to be an issue should WWIII come along.
The question is, will it shatter when the ship gets hit by a shock wave that does not kill the crew?
The controllers aren't indestructable but they're pretty good, (remember the old atari joysticks?)
As long they've got a spare or 2 in the original packaging stashed nearby, does it even matter?
I just find it more interesting that they're going with the older xbox 360 over the newer xbox one controllers.
yes it does. If you've been hit by a shockwave, torpedo, etc - you don't have time to pull something out of a box and replace a controller - you need it to continue functioning; not to mention you now have junk you have to take care of - you don't want it becoming shrapnel or other hazard in the *next* shockwave.
Why? Why invest that much effort into the controller? The position indicator would be the friggin' pole coming up through the floor. Want more price level indicators? Put a tape measure on the side of the the pole. All the controller does is make the pole go up when you push up and go around when you push to the side. What would be accomplished by investing hundreds of thousands in R&D for a what amounts to a toggle switch?
Reliability and safety. I doubt we want the operator choking on a chord; nor do we want the thing to fail at the wrong moment. Submarines deal with life-and-death situations during wartime - a fraction of a second and you might miss the signs of a torpedo or something else coming at you and now you have a major issue on hand.
So no, "the pull it out, toss it, and put a new one in" isn't a solution when ever second counts.
You can just "fix it in software" the same way you can fix a mouse with a post-it over the sensor in software: you can't.
You can fix the problem of sensor smoothing in software, and you can fix the problem of sensor failure with redundancy. So yes, you can effectively fix the problem in software.
Not necessarily - it all depends on your use-case. For the periscope...may be.
I've done optical encoders before, and we had an expensive part that received the signal - could take 4 of them - made by GE. The part was something like $1k; however, in certain scenarios when 2 were plugged in, the part would hiccup and we'd get a bad read where 1 of 3 bytes (for a 24-bit value) would be for the *next* read not the current read. However, the system was sensitive enough that this was a *big* problem. My only solution was to replace the expensive board - oddly enough an Arduino Mega ($60) with Robogaia hat ($35) solved the issue - in part b/c we also eliminated a whole other part of the system so timing was easier to control, and were actually dealing directly with the chipset to read it.
So no, software does not and cannot fix all things - and suggesting to do so is a dumb cop-out. There are places for software fixes; but there's at least as many for proper hardware fixes with better hardware. Software can only do as much as the hardware allows it and cannot be used to solve for bad hardware.
If you haven't already, go read the article, the summary doesn't do it justice. I'm guessing you are a mobile phone user, so you may not notice this, but mobile phone users are nowadays continually trying to force mobile phone users on the few remaining people who don't want one. I see this in my private life a lot. Some people straight-up try to use their influence over others, e.g. parents or bosses pushing a mobile on their kids or employees; some try to use social coercion, e.g. pushing people without a mobile more and more towards their out-crowd; some passive aggressively require phone use, e.g. people meeting up in a restaurant texting each other a change of venue at the last minute, leaving people without a mobile on them stranded. Some of my friends now have a mobile, even though they hate the thing. And before you tell them to just turn it off, go over the social coercion used to get them to get one and you'll notice that it has to be on. And even when off, the thing still drains your bank account. I've explained to them that they don't have to get a mobile on my account, that I'd accept them for what they are and would accommodate them, but although they were grateful they said most people just aren't very nice in this respect and they didn't want to throw most of their social life out of the window.
Very very true - especially if you have kids. Schools use them; babysitters use them; any child care facility uses them - all to text you. Very few use email as primary means of comms, especially in quick scenarios (e.g come get your kid - they got sick).
Not really true. I can't think of anything I can do with my phone that I can't do otherwise. While it's easy to pay bills with an app, I can still go into my bank or mail a cheque. I can still use a camera, even a film camera if I want to. I can still mail a letter rather than use email.
We didn't have data/text on our phones for years; finally had to add it after we had kids. All the orgs that focus on children (child care facilities, schools, church programs, etc) and babysitters basically expect that you have at least text capabilities and use that as their primary means of communications, especially if you kid is getting sick, etc.
TFS says "With the national jobless rate near a 16-year low" - which means there's a shortage of people overall. If the IT tech suffers from that, raise salaries, you say. OK, then the shortage moves around from one job area to another, but the fact remains: someone, somewhere, would end up having to outsource.
Well, TFS is wrong about the jobless rate being near a 16-year low b/c it's incorrectly calculated. We're still not generating enough jobs month-to-month (even with the improvement since the elections last November) to bring down the unemployment rate; so the calculated rate is crap b/c it's ignoring all the people that left the job market b/c the job market sucked and still generally does. Once you account for the labor participation rate being near a 50 year low, the unemployment rate ends up being near a 50 year high (though lower than what it was about a year ago - participation rate did nothing but drop under Obama which is why the unemployment rate dropped too).
90k is not a bad average starting salary
That all depends on where you live. $90k doesn't go very far in the NYC area. Making $90k in SC OTOH makes it go very far; $90k in SC is $140k in NYC according to the various Cost of Living Calculators (last I checked).
Unfortunately, it's far easier to destroy and harm than it is to create and improve... I doubt there are many among us who haven't derived some kind of pleasure from breaking something at some point in their lives. This does not, however, mean we should not try. Also no reason to completely write off the dark-side folks, sometimes they see the light and come around.
Lol....there are two very distinct mindsets - those that create, and those that destroy. Programmers/Engineers are good at the creating mindset while black/white hats are good at the destruction mindsets. It's usually hard for someone of one mindset to switch to the other - not impossible, but hard to do. And honestly we need both mindsets - which is really what Torvalds is gunning for; because if you only have people that know how to create something then it will be full of security holes.
...Amazon participated in the TV show Undercover Boss a few years back, and one of the days Bezos had to do the package loading job - running all over a warehouse floor. I wonder if the robots are the result of that?
I'm the same. TabGroups is very hard for me to live without.
Did you find anything usable for Chrome? I'm trying out TabsFolder currently, but the inability to move tabs around between existing groups is making it barely useful for me.
I have not. Nothing provides the same kind of functionality. Best I found in Chrome is Chrome's native "pin" tab functionality, but then the window gets overloaded with tabs very easy and there's no easy means (like with TabGroups) to switch to a tab. TabGroup's tab manager and the fact that each group is loaded/unloaded are really the keys to the success of TabGroups. About the only way to improve TabGroups is to manage multiple windows enabling multiple groups to be loaded simultaneously.
I use TabGroups to context-switch between different work projects, different personal research projects, etc. It makes my work day SO MUCH easier to handle.
I'd be open to totally different approaches to my problem - how to stop using a bunch of websites, easily switch to doing something different, and easily switch back later. And move things from one group/context/session/whatever to another. It doesn't have to look or feel like TabGroups as long as I can switch contexts relatively efficiently. It doesn't necessarily have to preserve per-tab history, though that is sometimes convenient.
I do the same kind of thing. Each tab group is a context/activity. The same URL might be opened in a few different tab groups. Works wonders to keep me down to a single window, and keep things well organized.
Also, Firefox's native "don't load tab until clicked" is far superior to the extension in Chrome that enables the same thing.