The FCC still requires the manufacturer to get a certificate for those 2.4 and 5.8 GHz radios or complete sets they sell on the market especially when combined with other electronics. As you note, it makes no sense so many cheaper-end brands will not have such certifications at all.
Does the drone have a micro controller that operates above a few hundred kHz (forgot the exact cut-off), then yes, the 'system' needs an FCC license or certificate of conformity just in case you fly too close near a radio tower unless it's "truly" home-brewed (no kit).
The FAA rules are an entirely different beast and this is what DJI is pushing - something that conforms with an FAA license similar to it requiring an FCC license, an endeavor smaller shops will not be able to afford.
Obviously DJI wants to limit the market to "legitimate" sellers. But as with radios, you *should* get an FCC license or your device *should* be certified but the cheap imports (anything sub-$150) simply isn't.
If an autonomous car were as easily gotten as a drone or an Android media player with no loss of life or damages there would be a boatload of them driving without VIN numbers.
Citrix + vGPU + beefy VDI + decent pipe: Those are a lot of prerequisites that most companies won't shell out for and end up being way more expensive than just giving people a decent desktop or laptop (which they still need). For streaming, not a problem, but 200ms latency on interactivity IS a huge issue.
Because there is no profit in space except where you can take from the government.
The problem here is that we're ALREADY using the private sector (Lockheed Martin and Boeing and a host of other smaller companies) but without any true management or expectations from NASA, these things tend to go over budget or completely replaced every time a politician wants some cred for his next campaign
The NASA budget is indeed small but it's being spent on hundreds of reviews over the same items. Nothing new is happening at NASA because it's politicized. Give a decent management NASA's budget without further interference and we'll go to Mars and back in 2030, give it to the current political appointees and when Trump leaves the White House, whatever projects were started will get cancelled again to spend on whatever the motivation of the new administration is (war, environment, local economies...)
Exactly, but the level of security required for your repo's and monitoring is not a developer problem, it's (again) a manager problem. Plenty of programs (Linux) get developed without massive and intrusive desktop security policies, all code submits should already be verified. The link you presented is about an intentional design, not a bug. When someone adds a if (string == "") { goto authenticated }; to your authentication code and you don't catch it for a decade, you have a code review problem, not a bug.
On my network, there is very little room to move laterally since we treat everything as if it were connected to the Internet (because it really is).
Taking away all the credentials from your dev's just makes them run a full-admin VDI or VM which is no better than running a desktop/laptop with full admin - companies like VMWare make it seem like VM/VD is the panacea while you're just shifting the problem around.
I agree that having a well-provisioned VDI is useful for development, especially if it's easy to cycle them back to their original states - you can run an untested binary and see what happens. The OP however asked about using VDI's for main development, as you stated, is unworkable.
If your company has such overbearing policies that a VDI becomes necessary, your company has failed.
Yes, but not so great for developing IN. I use VM's myself for running tests etc but I don't connect to a VM to run Eclipse. I'm not sure if you've ever needed a full-blown IDE but putting them in a VM (often without hardware acceleration) is going to be a pain in the nuts.
I work for a company with more than a thousand developers - Already, you're in the wrong venue. Unless you're a C-level executive, don't expect much change. You need white papers and golf clubs to change your company's policies, not/. comments.
and I'm participating in activities aimed at improving the work experience of developers - You're an outside consultant tasked with reducing the workforce by improving productivity. Don't forget that when you deal with your developers.
Our developers receive an ultrabook - A real developer can't work on an ultrabook that is rather powerful - It's an ultrabook, not powerful
but not really adapted for development (no admin rights, small storage capacity, restrictive security rules, etc.) - Your company is treating your developers like sales and customer support. Are you sure you're dealing with developers and not glorified tech support? If you are dealing with developers, you will also see high turnover and rather little experience. You're probably dealing with a developer sweatshop, not a well-managed tech house, change the culture around hiring first before you call these people "developers".
- They also have access to VDIs (more flexibility) Virtual desktops are for things that you require little interaction with or that can easily be destroyed, not for development. - but often complain of performance issues during certain hours of the day Well, what do you expect, again, you're treating developers like tech support, your company's priorities are wrong.
- Overall, developers want to have maximum autonomy, free choice of their tools (OS, IDE, etc.) and access to internal development environments (PaaS, GIT repositories, continuous delivery tools, etc.) If they don't have those, they're not going to be very productive developers. If you have thousands of developers without even basic version management and build tools, you better quit now, the company is doomed.
- We recently had a presentation of VMWare on desktop and application virtualization (Workstation & Horizon), which is supposedly the future of the desktops. Who got to play golf? VMWare is well behind on the market and only survives through inertia and takeovers. It's the Microsoft/IBM of VM.
- It sounds interesting on paper but I remain skeptical. Citrix did it better in the 2000s. It failed. For good reason.
- What is the best working environment for a developer, offering flexibility, performance and some level of free choice, You answered your own question
- without compromising security, compliance, licensing (etc.) requirements Recommend replacing management first. Compliance and licensing is a managerial thing and should be hardly required since the most powerful development tools are open source, for everything "necessary" that deals with evil business partners (Adobe, VMWare, Microsoft,...) get a site license. Your developers should be smart enough to maintain their own security if they need admin rights, the ones that aren't can be weeded out immediately.
- I would like you to share your experiences on BYOD, desktop virtualization, etc. and the level of satisfaction of the developers. BYOD: If your company is too cheap to provide the necessary machines then they get to deal with the headaches of BYOD. Desktop Virtualization: Tried and failed in the previous dotcom bubbles. Level of satisfaction is directly related to your management.
My thought was: There are still people forced to do work on a VD/VM? The last time a company made me use a Citrix instance, the entire office went to the premier of "The Matrix".
I'm not talking about testing and running final software compiles, but running an IDE over a home-Internet or shoddy company WiFi, even a VirtualBox or VMWare instance just kills productivity.
When your entire revenue is dependent on quantity with minimal quality investment you lose control. When you lose control things go down hill fast (just see what MySpace and Geocities eventually became). And there is currently no AI that can discriminate between poetry, let alone what certain markets find offensive.
From the other end: Although I don't understand why a potential advertiser would not want to promote their product in front of any audience. These types of things are bound to happen when you depend on a single vendor serving an entire market spanning pretty much every human endeavor, you're bound to be servicing both the best and worst parts.
Ad companies and YouTube channels alike need to turn to smaller, controllable and direct revenue models. If you make a private deal with an ad company both sides get what they want. Now the revenue is just being distributed to primarily the worst portions of society and decent content which is a minority of the 400h/min streams only gets a stupidly small share.
You're comparing two 20 year old proprietary compilers, one that went out of business before that post was even made. How hard did you have to dig for that one?
Contract law for businesses is a different beast than for individuals. Fewer consumer protections apply, you're expected to know a lot more about your industry and you're also considered to be able to hire a lawyer before entering into a contract.
Microsoft purchased LinkedIn so it could take all it's contact information and sell them to their customers and they beat Salesforce to the punch doing it. Look at me playing the world's tiniest violin.
As with any contract, everything is negotiable. Just don't use company resources to do it, because then it can be either appropriated or considered theft.
In the past I just crossed out everything I didn't like from the contract and returned it. In most of my current contracts I have an agreement that everything I do for the company will be open sourced.
Not just carrier subsidies but the radio in them is significantly different. Anytime you change a radio around (even if you're changing frequencies for different carriers or modulation), be ready to shell out big time for an FCC certification.
The iPad on the other hand just has BT/WiFi so much less strict regulations and as long as you keep the board and antenna's the same, putting a different shell on them isn't all that expensive.
I understand the concept behind RAID, but there is no way the slow ASIC with slow 1-4GB DDR2/3 RAM compete with the same drives directly attached to the CPU and potentially 100's of GB in DDR4 RAM. In your case your BBU RAID controller is a single point of failure, when your controller, its RAM and/or BBU fail, your file system will be corrupted so I wouldn't trust it with any 'write cache' policy unless you have a complement of them.
A modern file system with SSD write caches should have at least 2 of them mirrored as well if you care about your data, so at least you know that whatever happens, the data fsynced is going to be there regardless of what happens, even if your controller goes up in smoke, you have a week-long power outage or you change hardware. You can get battery-backed RAM-based SSD's as well, they actually have been around for a really long time and they're about the same price as a high-end hardware RAID controller.
Hardware RAID is ancient at this point, I wouldn't expect to see much further development in it. With SSD's there is no reason anymore to use hardware RAID or BBU's and hardware RAID controllers have been slower than the aggregate of even spinning disks for well over a decade now.
Higher education is indeed an investment but capitalism doesn't just throw money at a problem and hope something good comes out of it (governments do that). Contrary to popular belief, the majority of people aren't smart enough to complete any course in the so-called "STEM" majors and even then, the majority of the students does not have the mindset of a good engineer or scientist and ends up not going into these field at all, a significant amount bails out in the first few months or after a year.
I work with these kids, I work at one of these 50k+/y colleges, we have massive overpopulation issues and sad to say, very few interns, undergrads and even grad students would be employable, not because the school is bad but because the students either don't have the brains or the passion and are there to either satisfy their parents, because they got an entitlement scholarship or because they belief they'll get a good paycheck. And very few of the massive amount of people that work at my labs each year end up in the field later on in life (think 1 or 2 per year) and those people didn't get there with handouts.
I'm not saying the government shouldn't be paying anything, but we shouldn't be paying for people to party. If you have people that are passionate and smart enough to do mathematics or physics, the people the government and industry then uses for space exploration and innovation, I would be glad to give them full scholarships. But giving a blank check to everyone that managed to squeeze out another human being 20 years ago is just adding to the problem, raising the prices unnecessarily.
If you're a US resident you would have to pay income tax or at least declare it as an investment income regardless of how you convert it. You can go to any other country to cash out or convert it into goods, even if you could buy a car with it, you have to pay the tax man. And that's not unique to the US.
The tax man however does not necessarily need to know where the money has been or currently is (how you are investing or realizing the profit is not recorded) as long as you don't use the money.
Monetary transactions above a certain value also need to be recorded, again, not unique to the US. If you make any further investment (house or otherwise) with the money/value, the bank also wants to know where it came from for credit reasons (to make sure you didn't owe a loanshark).
In none of those instances do you need to declare the full transaction history of your investments or profits. The "problem" with Bitcoin is that it explicitly does not offer anonymity (you can't launder bitcoins) and gives you a full transaction history regardless. To request anonymity from an explicitly public ledger is ludicrous. You can only hide the owner of a bitcoin through technical means as you can attempt to hide any transaction on the Internet but it's only incidental and also detrimental to the Bitcoin system.
I don't see why the state should subsidize anything unless there is a direct and immediate profit to it. The greatest portion of college educational programs (most colleges have between 50 and 150 different programs) are going to produce a very small amount of dedicated people for very niche fields, I don't need my money funding the rest of the people that are there just to get a degree.
If someone has a passion for something, they'll find a way of doing it, in all other cases, it's a waste of money to just surf the programs until you find one you don't utterly fail at. If you truly have a shortage of workers, let the industry fund the gap and in certain cases, I can agree to the government funding sciences like physics and astronomy (because there is no commercial benefit but there is a huge social benefit to it) but the number of people graduating from physics and astronomy is tiny compared to the amount of students that a college accepts, in some fields less than a dozen people graduate per year across the entire US.
And therein lies a part of the problem, do you really want YOUR tax dollars going to a deadbeat student living of the system for 10 years to end up with an unemployable Social Studies Major?
The EU socializes everybody's bad decisions via 55% income taxes and 25% sales taxes.
In the US, you make this problem an individual decision, and you live with your decisions for bad or for good. Most people right now are opting the bad option by throwing sizable amounts of money at their children who are dumber than a backdoor in the delusion something good comes out of it. In the end, they'll still end up working at McDonalds but now with $100k in debt and become less employable as time goes along (college degrees work against you for most lower-end jobs).
The thing is people keep paying for it. The top colleges will raise the prices until they don't get applications for more than 1000% of their capacity. Most colleges are adding capacity at record-breaking rate and diversifying their offering from 'classroom-only' to hybrid in order to fit more people in the existing buildings. Colleges are adding 15% more students per year in some cases to keep up with the demand.
The solution will have to come to either more colleges (think online degree mills) or less people applying for college. You can argue all you want for the merit of a particular degree, but as long as people will pay for it, colleges will offer it, it doesn't matter who ends up with the debt.
You can argue the benefits of the tax payer paying for it, but I'd rather families and individuals make those decisions on their own than forcing us to pay at gunpoint for their bad decisions.
Because fitting a globe onto a flat rectangle is hard and maps (vellum and ink) are expensive. The Mercator projection fits nicely on a near-square with a minimal amount of 'waste' in space and ink while still fitting (almost) everything of relevance which is why it was successful compared to other maps of it's day. Pretty much every other projection makes the map larger, wastes space or becomes massively convoluted to read.
You're not losing $100M because of Apple, you're losing $100M investment because you didn't hold up your end of the bargain, in all other cases, a contract cannot just be voided at the whim of either party.
Slashdot Mirror
The FCC still requires the manufacturer to get a certificate for those 2.4 and 5.8 GHz radios or complete sets they sell on the market especially when combined with other electronics. As you note, it makes no sense so many cheaper-end brands will not have such certifications at all.
Does the drone have a micro controller that operates above a few hundred kHz (forgot the exact cut-off), then yes, the 'system' needs an FCC license or certificate of conformity just in case you fly too close near a radio tower unless it's "truly" home-brewed (no kit).
The FAA rules are an entirely different beast and this is what DJI is pushing - something that conforms with an FAA license similar to it requiring an FCC license, an endeavor smaller shops will not be able to afford.
Obviously DJI wants to limit the market to "legitimate" sellers. But as with radios, you *should* get an FCC license or your device *should* be certified but the cheap imports (anything sub-$150) simply isn't.
If an autonomous car were as easily gotten as a drone or an Android media player with no loss of life or damages there would be a boatload of them driving without VIN numbers.
Citrix + vGPU + beefy VDI + decent pipe: Those are a lot of prerequisites that most companies won't shell out for and end up being way more expensive than just giving people a decent desktop or laptop (which they still need). For streaming, not a problem, but 200ms latency on interactivity IS a huge issue.
Because there is no profit in space except where you can take from the government.
The problem here is that we're ALREADY using the private sector (Lockheed Martin and Boeing and a host of other smaller companies) but without any true management or expectations from NASA, these things tend to go over budget or completely replaced every time a politician wants some cred for his next campaign
The NASA budget is indeed small but it's being spent on hundreds of reviews over the same items. Nothing new is happening at NASA because it's politicized. Give a decent management NASA's budget without further interference and we'll go to Mars and back in 2030, give it to the current political appointees and when Trump leaves the White House, whatever projects were started will get cancelled again to spend on whatever the motivation of the new administration is (war, environment, local economies...)
Exactly, but the level of security required for your repo's and monitoring is not a developer problem, it's (again) a manager problem. Plenty of programs (Linux) get developed without massive and intrusive desktop security policies, all code submits should already be verified. The link you presented is about an intentional design, not a bug. When someone adds a if (string == "") { goto authenticated }; to your authentication code and you don't catch it for a decade, you have a code review problem, not a bug.
On my network, there is very little room to move laterally since we treat everything as if it were connected to the Internet (because it really is).
Taking away all the credentials from your dev's just makes them run a full-admin VDI or VM which is no better than running a desktop/laptop with full admin - companies like VMWare make it seem like VM/VD is the panacea while you're just shifting the problem around.
I agree that having a well-provisioned VDI is useful for development, especially if it's easy to cycle them back to their original states - you can run an untested binary and see what happens. The OP however asked about using VDI's for main development, as you stated, is unworkable.
If your company has such overbearing policies that a VDI becomes necessary, your company has failed.
Yes, but not so great for developing IN. I use VM's myself for running tests etc but I don't connect to a VM to run Eclipse. I'm not sure if you've ever needed a full-blown IDE but putting them in a VM (often without hardware acceleration) is going to be a pain in the nuts.
I work for a company with more than a thousand developers /. comments.
- Already, you're in the wrong venue. Unless you're a C-level executive, don't expect much change. You need white papers and golf clubs to change your company's policies, not
and I'm participating in activities aimed at improving the work experience of developers
- You're an outside consultant tasked with reducing the workforce by improving productivity. Don't forget that when you deal with your developers.
Our developers receive an ultrabook
- A real developer can't work on an ultrabook
that is rather powerful
- It's an ultrabook, not powerful
but not really adapted for development (no admin rights, small storage capacity, restrictive security rules, etc.)
- Your company is treating your developers like sales and customer support. Are you sure you're dealing with developers and not glorified tech support? If you are dealing with developers, you will also see high turnover and rather little experience. You're probably dealing with a developer sweatshop, not a well-managed tech house, change the culture around hiring first before you call these people "developers".
- They also have access to VDIs (more flexibility)
Virtual desktops are for things that you require little interaction with or that can easily be destroyed, not for development.
- but often complain of performance issues during certain hours of the day
Well, what do you expect, again, you're treating developers like tech support, your company's priorities are wrong.
- Overall, developers want to have maximum autonomy, free choice of their tools (OS, IDE, etc.) and access to internal development environments (PaaS, GIT repositories, continuous delivery tools, etc.)
If they don't have those, they're not going to be very productive developers. If you have thousands of developers without even basic version management and build tools, you better quit now, the company is doomed.
- We recently had a presentation of VMWare on desktop and application virtualization (Workstation & Horizon), which is supposedly the future of the desktops.
Who got to play golf? VMWare is well behind on the market and only survives through inertia and takeovers. It's the Microsoft/IBM of VM.
- It sounds interesting on paper but I remain skeptical.
Citrix did it better in the 2000s. It failed. For good reason.
- What is the best working environment for a developer, offering flexibility, performance and some level of free choice,
You answered your own question
- without compromising security, compliance, licensing (etc.) requirements ...) get a site license. Your developers should be smart enough to maintain their own security if they need admin rights, the ones that aren't can be weeded out immediately.
Recommend replacing management first. Compliance and licensing is a managerial thing and should be hardly required since the most powerful development tools are open source, for everything "necessary" that deals with evil business partners (Adobe, VMWare, Microsoft,
- I would like you to share your experiences on BYOD, desktop virtualization, etc. and the level of satisfaction of the developers.
BYOD: If your company is too cheap to provide the necessary machines then they get to deal with the headaches of BYOD.
Desktop Virtualization: Tried and failed in the previous dotcom bubbles.
Level of satisfaction is directly related to your management.
My thought was: There are still people forced to do work on a VD/VM? The last time a company made me use a Citrix instance, the entire office went to the premier of "The Matrix".
I'm not talking about testing and running final software compiles, but running an IDE over a home-Internet or shoddy company WiFi, even a VirtualBox or VMWare instance just kills productivity.
When your entire revenue is dependent on quantity with minimal quality investment you lose control. When you lose control things go down hill fast (just see what MySpace and Geocities eventually became). And there is currently no AI that can discriminate between poetry, let alone what certain markets find offensive.
From the other end: Although I don't understand why a potential advertiser would not want to promote their product in front of any audience. These types of things are bound to happen when you depend on a single vendor serving an entire market spanning pretty much every human endeavor, you're bound to be servicing both the best and worst parts.
Ad companies and YouTube channels alike need to turn to smaller, controllable and direct revenue models. If you make a private deal with an ad company both sides get what they want. Now the revenue is just being distributed to primarily the worst portions of society and decent content which is a minority of the 400h/min streams only gets a stupidly small share.
You're comparing two 20 year old proprietary compilers, one that went out of business before that post was even made. How hard did you have to dig for that one?
The article is talking about Visual Studio, possibly the worst compiler in the world. There isn't much optimization going on there.
Contract law for businesses is a different beast than for individuals. Fewer consumer protections apply, you're expected to know a lot more about your industry and you're also considered to be able to hire a lawyer before entering into a contract.
Microsoft purchased LinkedIn so it could take all it's contact information and sell them to their customers and they beat Salesforce to the punch doing it. Look at me playing the world's tiniest violin.
As with any contract, everything is negotiable. Just don't use company resources to do it, because then it can be either appropriated or considered theft.
In the past I just crossed out everything I didn't like from the contract and returned it. In most of my current contracts I have an agreement that everything I do for the company will be open sourced.
Not just carrier subsidies but the radio in them is significantly different. Anytime you change a radio around (even if you're changing frequencies for different carriers or modulation), be ready to shell out big time for an FCC certification.
The iPad on the other hand just has BT/WiFi so much less strict regulations and as long as you keep the board and antenna's the same, putting a different shell on them isn't all that expensive.
I understand the concept behind RAID, but there is no way the slow ASIC with slow 1-4GB DDR2/3 RAM compete with the same drives directly attached to the CPU and potentially 100's of GB in DDR4 RAM. In your case your BBU RAID controller is a single point of failure, when your controller, its RAM and/or BBU fail, your file system will be corrupted so I wouldn't trust it with any 'write cache' policy unless you have a complement of them.
A modern file system with SSD write caches should have at least 2 of them mirrored as well if you care about your data, so at least you know that whatever happens, the data fsynced is going to be there regardless of what happens, even if your controller goes up in smoke, you have a week-long power outage or you change hardware. You can get battery-backed RAM-based SSD's as well, they actually have been around for a really long time and they're about the same price as a high-end hardware RAID controller.
Hardware RAID is ancient at this point, I wouldn't expect to see much further development in it. With SSD's there is no reason anymore to use hardware RAID or BBU's and hardware RAID controllers have been slower than the aggregate of even spinning disks for well over a decade now.
Higher education is indeed an investment but capitalism doesn't just throw money at a problem and hope something good comes out of it (governments do that). Contrary to popular belief, the majority of people aren't smart enough to complete any course in the so-called "STEM" majors and even then, the majority of the students does not have the mindset of a good engineer or scientist and ends up not going into these field at all, a significant amount bails out in the first few months or after a year.
I work with these kids, I work at one of these 50k+/y colleges, we have massive overpopulation issues and sad to say, very few interns, undergrads and even grad students would be employable, not because the school is bad but because the students either don't have the brains or the passion and are there to either satisfy their parents, because they got an entitlement scholarship or because they belief they'll get a good paycheck. And very few of the massive amount of people that work at my labs each year end up in the field later on in life (think 1 or 2 per year) and those people didn't get there with handouts.
I'm not saying the government shouldn't be paying anything, but we shouldn't be paying for people to party. If you have people that are passionate and smart enough to do mathematics or physics, the people the government and industry then uses for space exploration and innovation, I would be glad to give them full scholarships. But giving a blank check to everyone that managed to squeeze out another human being 20 years ago is just adding to the problem, raising the prices unnecessarily.
If you're a US resident you would have to pay income tax or at least declare it as an investment income regardless of how you convert it. You can go to any other country to cash out or convert it into goods, even if you could buy a car with it, you have to pay the tax man. And that's not unique to the US.
The tax man however does not necessarily need to know where the money has been or currently is (how you are investing or realizing the profit is not recorded) as long as you don't use the money.
Monetary transactions above a certain value also need to be recorded, again, not unique to the US. If you make any further investment (house or otherwise) with the money/value, the bank also wants to know where it came from for credit reasons (to make sure you didn't owe a loanshark).
In none of those instances do you need to declare the full transaction history of your investments or profits. The "problem" with Bitcoin is that it explicitly does not offer anonymity (you can't launder bitcoins) and gives you a full transaction history regardless. To request anonymity from an explicitly public ledger is ludicrous. You can only hide the owner of a bitcoin through technical means as you can attempt to hide any transaction on the Internet but it's only incidental and also detrimental to the Bitcoin system.
I don't see why the state should subsidize anything unless there is a direct and immediate profit to it. The greatest portion of college educational programs (most colleges have between 50 and 150 different programs) are going to produce a very small amount of dedicated people for very niche fields, I don't need my money funding the rest of the people that are there just to get a degree.
If someone has a passion for something, they'll find a way of doing it, in all other cases, it's a waste of money to just surf the programs until you find one you don't utterly fail at. If you truly have a shortage of workers, let the industry fund the gap and in certain cases, I can agree to the government funding sciences like physics and astronomy (because there is no commercial benefit but there is a huge social benefit to it) but the number of people graduating from physics and astronomy is tiny compared to the amount of students that a college accepts, in some fields less than a dozen people graduate per year across the entire US.
And therein lies a part of the problem, do you really want YOUR tax dollars going to a deadbeat student living of the system for 10 years to end up with an unemployable Social Studies Major?
The EU socializes everybody's bad decisions via 55% income taxes and 25% sales taxes.
In the US, you make this problem an individual decision, and you live with your decisions for bad or for good. Most people right now are opting the bad option by throwing sizable amounts of money at their children who are dumber than a backdoor in the delusion something good comes out of it. In the end, they'll still end up working at McDonalds but now with $100k in debt and become less employable as time goes along (college degrees work against you for most lower-end jobs).
The thing is people keep paying for it. The top colleges will raise the prices until they don't get applications for more than 1000% of their capacity. Most colleges are adding capacity at record-breaking rate and diversifying their offering from 'classroom-only' to hybrid in order to fit more people in the existing buildings. Colleges are adding 15% more students per year in some cases to keep up with the demand.
The solution will have to come to either more colleges (think online degree mills) or less people applying for college. You can argue all you want for the merit of a particular degree, but as long as people will pay for it, colleges will offer it, it doesn't matter who ends up with the debt.
You can argue the benefits of the tax payer paying for it, but I'd rather families and individuals make those decisions on their own than forcing us to pay at gunpoint for their bad decisions.
Because fitting a globe onto a flat rectangle is hard and maps (vellum and ink) are expensive. The Mercator projection fits nicely on a near-square with a minimal amount of 'waste' in space and ink while still fitting (almost) everything of relevance which is why it was successful compared to other maps of it's day. Pretty much every other projection makes the map larger, wastes space or becomes massively convoluted to read.
You're not losing $100M because of Apple, you're losing $100M investment because you didn't hold up your end of the bargain, in all other cases, a contract cannot just be voided at the whim of either party.