Well, I have no idea about the USA. However the car manufactures I was involved with have millions of miles of test runs and as far as I understood the colleagues doing them: it is required by law to get certification to get the cars on the road. And that is not only for self driving but for any "autonomous" thing on the car like lane detection, collision avoidance, pedestrian detection, sign detection etc. p.p.
Even simple things like anti blocking brakes need hundred thousands of miles of test runs.
Of course it is relevant, as you obviously are to lazy to check the news. Shipping lanes are not hundrets of miles wide, that would be completely pointless.
Obviously it was not trivial for the destroyer, otherwise he had noticed that the ship it collided with was behind the ship he avoided to collide with... but as you don't read news you don't know that the destroyer tried to fiddle itself between three ships. Two it avoided and the third they oversaw.
The correct way, braindead easy, would have been to adjust course in paralell to the commercial traffic, that usually means a turn to 'the right'. Ride with the flow till there is a sufficient gap between the incomming traffic, and then cross to the other side.
Obviously a Pegasus can not fly faster than a Griffin. At least not faster than my Griffin:) But when you come up with a faster Pegasus, we can have a race!
Regaring self driving cars: before one gets clearing on the road they have literally millions of miles of test runs under supervision.
Dynamic typed languages have their benefits, too. I also grew up with static typed languages, and preferred them because I make easy typos. However IDEs are getting better and flag typos in dynamic typed languages. Consider that programming in assembly basically is untyped... on the other hand dynamic typed languages only make sense if the runtime environment is solid, e.g. SmallTalk... JS is ok, but everything below objects (ints, strings, booleans) is error prone.
RAILS, regardless of Groovy on RAILS or Ruby on RAILS has absolutely nothing to do with WEB! It is about DB access, and automatic mapping of an OO language's objects into a relational data base.
Sorry, you are mistaken. I originally answered to a post where the author said: 'I don't want to save manually, I expect a modern computer to keep every keystroke on disk, so that after a power outage it is exactly at the same point where it happened' I was not even the first one using the word transaction, that was a response to my answer were I said: 'this is impossible'.
Sorry, that I over read your 'it does not work' part:)
You or your parent claimed that a computer is able to recover completly if power fails during a transaction.
Your rename example is a perfect example why it can not work.
You want to rename "something" into "anything" and after 'any' is written to the disk, the file's name is "anymthing" (and that super simplyfied, because in reality the whole disk block contains unpredictable data and your directory might be destroyed and the original file as well as the new one are both lost)
Yes, you should read a book about it instead of posting your stupid ideas how computers or physics or any other stuff works.
The idea of transactions is precisely this: either everything works and even after a power failure you can recover 'behind that transaction' or you can recover 'in front of the transaction'. If the power fails during the transaction, thet it depemds on the system, if it can replay the transaction and 'forward behind it' as if it had succeded. Nevertheless, every thing you are currently doing... in a transaction that has not enough data written to disk successfully, is always lost completely!!
I don't have to educate me about anything regarding this theead: because I know everythi relevant already.
If you still have mot realized till now that the destroyer crossed a shipping lane and that the cargo ship was traveling in a straight line in that lane, then you are beyond help.
Your idea how many sattelites a GPS receiver uses is completely bollocks. Basically all GPS receivers use as many sattelites as they can see. And that is usually about 6 - 8.
So to spoof a ships position you need to spoof all signals from them, know which satellites are visible (e.g. having your own GPS) and a super accurate clock. If your clock is not accurate enough the ships spoofed GPS will have the 'impression' that the ship is jumpint around.
Anyway, you are such a moron it is unbeliefeable. Sea faring vessels don't use GPS on autopilote. Human pilots don't use GPS to navigate in shipping lanes.
The ships in such traffic areas are traveling with a few miles distance to each other, probbably down to a hundret yards. How stupid do you think commercial pilots are?
Look 1 minute not out of the window and you probbaly have collided with half a dozen ships already.
Loook on a damn map and check where that accident happend. And reread the/. article. Dozens of people already have explained what happend and you moron ride on the dead horse of a GPS spoofing attack.
Actually I doubt you ever taught Physics. Anyway, you can leave those ad hominems out. And you can leave out your layman examples of drones spoofing GPS. There was no drone spoofing GPS, so: why do you try to educate the world?
All your points are complete bollocks.
The collision was in a shipping lane. Hundrets of ships probably where around collision. No pilot is looking on a GPS screen and driving in circles when dozens of ships in front of him follow a straight line, and dozens behind him do the same and hi has dozens of ships incomming on the counter lane in front of him.
Btw: I never said your drone example is impossible, so why are you riding this dead horse?
If you still have mot realized till now that the destroyer crossed a shipping lane and that the cargo ship was traveling in a straight line in that lane, then you are beyond help.
Of you still have mot realized till now that the destroyer crossed a shipping lane and that the cargo ship was traveling in a straight line in that lane, then you are beyond help.
Either you write it french or you write it english.
First e without accent and second e with, is in both languages wrong.
It might be accepted in USA to have accent at the end, however it makes no sense.
You obviously don't know the differences between the three french accents, otherwise you would write resume correctly and your explanation would not have been wrong (sorry can not type the e with an accent on my iPad)
Slashdot Mirror
Well,
I have no idea about the USA.
However the car manufactures I was involved with have millions of miles of test runs and as far as I understood the colleagues doing them: it is required by law to get certification to get the cars on the road.
And that is not only for self driving but for any "autonomous" thing on the car like lane detection, collision avoidance, pedestrian detection, sign detection etc. p.p.
Even simple things like anti blocking brakes need hundred thousands of miles of test runs.
However it was somehow funny :D
Yes, I admit it :D
Of course it is relevant, as you obviously are to lazy to check the news.
Shipping lanes are not hundrets of miles wide, that would be completely pointless.
Obviously it was not trivial for the destroyer, otherwise he had noticed that the ship it collided with was behind the ship he avoided to collide with ... but as you don't read news you don't know that the destroyer tried to fiddle itself between three ships. Two it avoided and the third they oversaw.
The correct way, braindead easy, would have been to adjust course in paralell to the commercial traffic, that usually means a turn to 'the right'. Ride with the flow till there is a sufficient gap between the incomming traffic, and then cross to the other side.
Obviously a Pegasus can not fly faster than a Griffin. :)
At least not faster than my Griffin
But when you come up with a faster Pegasus, we can have a race!
Regaring self driving cars: before one gets clearing on the road they have literally millions of miles of test runs under supervision.
Did you try to be funny or are you really so far away from reality in your computerized high tech future world?
Branch: part of a tree.
Dropped on the road.
Your car can not proceede.
What do you do?
I'm a stupid german, and even I grasp that ;)
Oki, doki. My bad then :)
I don't care what Wikipedia claims.
When Rails was invented it was all about DBs, and the web part came much later.
And when you want to throw MVC into the game, the C is on the server, not on the web frontend in the browser. So it has nothing to do with web at all.
Motherland is the land you are born in.
Fatherland is the land you fight for.
A bit absurd, isn't it?
Unless you use Vaadin(GWT), assuming you meant a web frontend.
Or you have a heavy weight client and use Swing/JavaFX.
Dynamic typed languages have their benefits, too. ... on the other hand dynamic typed languages only make sense if the runtime environment is solid, e.g. SmallTalk ... JS is ok, but everything below objects (ints, strings, booleans) is error prone.
I also grew up with static typed languages, and preferred them because I make easy typos. However IDEs are getting better and flag typos in dynamic typed languages.
Consider that programming in assembly basically is untyped
RAILS, regardless of Groovy on RAILS or Ruby on RAILS has absolutely nothing to do with WEB!
It is about DB access, and automatic mapping of an OO language's objects into a relational data base.
For C++ we had hot code swapping 20 years ago, long before Java.
Unfortunately only in selected IDEs or OS platforms.
However I don't know how the status quo is right now, perhaps no one does it anymore.
GWT is doing just fine, but meanwhile we have about 4 variations of it, vaadin, ext GWT, Sencha ... probbaly more.
While one group basically puts Java into the browser the other group puts JS on the backend ...
And except for brain dead casting rules, JS is a superb language. If you don't like its original syntax use CoffeeScript or TypeScript.
Or you double the amount of bugs. ...
In the browser the social security number check does not work correctly and on the backend my email gets rejected
Sorry, you are mistaken.
I originally answered to a post where the author said: 'I don't want to save manually, I expect a modern computer to keep every keystroke on disk, so that after a power outage it is exactly at the same point where it happened'
I was not even the first one using the word transaction, that was a response to my answer were I said: 'this is impossible'.
Sorry, that I over read your 'it does not work' part :)
You or your parent claimed that a computer is able to recover completly if power fails during a transaction.
Your rename example is a perfect example why it can not work.
You want to rename "something" into "anything" and after 'any' is written to the disk, the file's name is "anymthing" (and that super simplyfied, because in reality the whole disk block contains unpredictable data and your directory might be destroyed and the original file as well as the new one are both lost)
Yes, you should read a book about it instead of posting your stupid ideas how computers or physics or any other stuff works.
The idea of transactions is precisely this: either everything works and even after a power failure you can recover 'behind that transaction' or you can recover 'in front of the transaction'. If the power fails during the transaction, thet it depemds on the system, if it can replay the transaction and 'forward behind it' as if it had succeded. Nevertheless, every thing you are currently doing ... in a transaction that has not enough data written to disk successfully, is always lost completely!!
I don't have to educate me about anything regarding this theead: because I know everythi relevant already.
If you still have mot realized till now that the destroyer crossed a shipping lane and that the cargo ship was traveling in a straight line in that lane, then you are beyond help.
Your idea how many sattelites a GPS receiver uses is completely bollocks. Basically all GPS receivers use as many sattelites as they can see. And that is usually about 6 - 8.
So to spoof a ships position you need to spoof all signals from them, know which satellites are visible (e.g. having your own GPS) and a super accurate clock. If your clock is not accurate enough the ships spoofed GPS will have the 'impression' that the ship is jumpint around.
Anyway, you are such a moron it is unbeliefeable. Sea faring vessels don't use GPS on autopilote. Human pilots don't use GPS to navigate in shipping lanes.
The ships in such traffic areas are traveling with a few miles distance to each other, probbably down to a hundret yards. How stupid do you think commercial pilots are?
Look 1 minute not out of the window and you probbaly have collided with half a dozen ships already.
Loook on a damn map and check where that accident happend. And reread the /. article. Dozens of people already have explained what happend and you moron ride on the dead horse of a GPS spoofing attack.
Actually I doubt you ever taught Physics. Anyway, you can leave those ad hominems out.
And you can leave out your layman examples of drones spoofing GPS. There was no drone spoofing GPS, so: why do you try to educate the world?
All your points are complete bollocks.
The collision was in a shipping lane. Hundrets of ships probably where around collision. No pilot is looking on a GPS screen and driving in circles when dozens of ships in front of him follow a straight line, and dozens behind him do the same and hi has dozens of ships incomming on the counter lane in front of him.
Btw: I never said your drone example is impossible, so why are you riding this dead horse?
If you still have mot realized till now that the destroyer crossed a shipping lane and that the cargo ship was traveling in a straight line in that lane, then you are beyond help.
Of you still have mot realized till now that the destroyer crossed a shipping lane and that the cargo ship was traveling in a straight line in that lane, then you are beyond help.
If you put a device like you proclaim, on a ship, then it is not jamming, but tampering.
Jamming is done from a distance, and I pointed out that this would affect not a single ship but all in its vicinity.
The signal from GPS jammer located near a GPS receiver would be completely undetectable 10 meters away.
Of course it would be completely undetecable, it is a no brainer.
So why are you riding this dead horse?
Either you write it french or you write it english.
First e without accent and second e with, is in both languages wrong.
It might be accepted in USA to have accent at the end, however it makes no sense.
You obviously don't know the differences between the three french accents, otherwise you would write resume correctly and your explanation would not have been wrong (sorry can not type the e with an accent on my iPad)
There was no GPS spoofing involved at all, why don't you read the news instead of spreading your conspiracy theory?
Erm, why do you shit no brainers? I had physics in school, you know ....
I guess the destroyer and the cargo ship must have a strong force field that they collided with each other while hundreds of meters apart ...