They make airplane sized scales...perhaps just build them into the taxiway and have a wireless communications to the plane of the weight.
How many times has the total weight been entered completely right? Do you think you can make the system that you propose work with a lower failure rate? Good luck.
... then you can be 100 percent sure that there wouldn't be a flag fluttering in the wind. "Hey boss, I checked the film, and the wind is making the flag move". "Don't worry, nobody will notice". Really? What kind of idiot do you have to be to believe that could happen? If there was a flag moving in the wind, the recording would have been repeated.
if he didnt see it as a threat, he would ignore it like all the other devices that compete.
Strange enough, half the Apple haters complain that Cook is an arrogant bastard because he tells the world what he thinks of this "surface book", and the other half claims that he must be afraid.
If you check the sum of digits, you find that five out of every six consecutive numbers are divisible by 2 or 3, and only one isn't. Normally two out of six numbers are not divisible by 2 or 3. That means these numbers are only half as likely as your average random number to be primes.
Normally, the probability that a random integer n is a prime number is about 1 / ln n. The probability that a random n digit number is a prime is about 1 / 2.3n. With these numbers, it is about 1 / 4.6n.
We can estimate the number of primes that we should find while adding all (0.9 * 10^k) k-digit numbers, ending with a number of (k - 1/9) * 10^9 digits: That estimate is about 0.5 + (1 / 4.6) / (k - 10/9). That's about 0.5444 for six digit numbers added, about 0.5369 for seven digit numbers, about 0.5315 for eight digit numbers. Hoping for a solution within the first million numbers is optimistic.
" that can figure out where it is even if it has no map or GPS"... OK, I'm going to drop you off in the middle of Kentucky mountain area with no GPS and no map, leave you stranded with noone to talk to and you should just magically know where you are.... sorry but NO. Unless I had been there before (i.e. prior knowledge or.... mapping) I will have no clue where I am and will have to basically start driving in one direction (which these cars can do) until I figure out where I am.
Note that a self-driven car will almost always have GPS and now its exact location. It will just sometimes not have an accurate map of the area directly around it. Both self driven car and car driven by me will proceed to the nearest road, then make a guess which direction to turn. The difference is that the self driven care will always know where it is and what direction it is going. It can't get lost. If it returns to a place where it was before it can take that into account.
Agree. People keep bringing up this scenario, but it really is very unrealistic. If you are travelling at motorway speeds, then why is there a crowd of people near the motorway?
I was told by British police that four percent of road deaths happen on the motorway (which makes it the safest place to drive by far). Of these four percent, 20% are pedestrians. Which makes the motorway an awfully dangerous place for pedestrians.
The issue is, human drivers have a strong instinct of self-preservation. Someone who has to decide between the parade and the tree in a split second will probably avoid the tree out of sheer instinct.
Actually, the most likely thing that person would do is nothing (and the car goes wherever it goes). The second most likely thing is that the person avoids whatever is happening without action. If the car aims at people, that's the immediate danger and the driver will try to avoid that without thinking about the secondary danger of killing himself. If the car aims at the tree, that's the immediate danger and the driver will try to avoid that without thinking about the secondary danger of killing many others.
The real test of artificial intelligence will come when the self-driving vehicle will have to decide between plowing into a crowd of people to protect the driver, and smashing into a tree to protect the crowd of people - but killing the driver, when the accident is inevitable.
The real test of driver intelligence and ethics will come when the driver of a human-driven vehicle will have to decide between plowing into a crowd of people to protect himsel, and smashing into a tree to protect the crowd of people but killing himself, when the accident is inevitable.
On the other hand, if you as the driver ever allow such a situation to arise, and you plow into the crowd, you'll hopefully go to jail for a very long time.
I picked a random problem off the list called 4-sum, read it, it obviously had a solution in O (n^2 log n), and the bloody website claims O (n^3). They should be ashamed.
If that post above does't make sense, it's Slashdot rubbish treatmen of ordinary text.
So one of these clever guys says that checking whether a + b lessthan a does not correctly find all unsigned integer overflows, because of integer promotions. Dead wrong. If there are integer promotions, then there is no overflow. So a + b lessthan a is pointless because it is always false, but it _does_ correctly find all overflows. Even when there aren't any.
And fuck slashdot with its stupid ass "slow down cowboy" shit that doesn't let you post of correction of a post that was messed up by slashdot.
And Linus is right, while Hannes and Rasmus are dead wrong.
One of these clever guys says that checking whether a + b
Then they say that these macros allow to fix problems without any thinking. Dead wrong. Without thinking, every time you use these macros there is a 50% or greater chance to introduce a bug. On the other hand, if you check on theregister for Linus' replacement code, it is simple, trivial, and obviously correct.
An obvious sign of the brain damage involved is someone figuring out that they need a result of at least 8, and instead of checking "if (x 8)" they check "if (x = 7)".
There were the very widespread Motorola 68k processors, used in Macs, Atari and Amiga computers for many years, where a signed integer addition overflow definitely invoked undefined behaviour.
Take "if (a + b > 0) {... }". You seem to be someone who thinks nothing could go wrong. On these processors, an integer addition set the condition flags according to the mathematical result of the operation, ignoring overflow. So "if (MAX_INT + 1 > 0)" would produce a true condition. But store the result of MAX_INT + 1 and compare the stored result with 0, and it's false because there was an overflow, giving a negative result.
Why do you think it would probably work? Over-the-top insults and tantrums typically don't work; it creates resistance and anger, and is a very unproductive way to deal with things.
To repeat that kind of code, you would have to argue that it was anywhere near acceptable. And you can't. I looked at the three versions of the code on theregister, and the first version is a serious bug which needed fixing, the second that the rant was about is an absolute WTF, and the third is absolutely clean and obvious and what I would expect any sane programmer to write.
Ok, this is a serious rant. If it gets you upset and you are so upset that you insist on continuing to write that kind of code, you are not only incompetent, but also childish.
Apple does have a monopoly on the Apple AppStore. So if Apple decided not to allow any apps that Amazon produces (like Amazon Shopping), then that would be a very similar abuse of Apple's power, the other direction.
"Apple AppStore" is not a category where you can have a monopoly that counts legally, because people are free to buy non-Apple phones and do so in masses. But then you are right, it is the same in the other direction.
iOS != tvOS (jeez, what an inspired name, Apple - almost as inspired as "Apple TV"...) And regardless of the APIs, it's a totally different screen/UI and input method.
Sure, there is nothing clever about the name "Apple TV". Or about "Apple Watch", for example. But potential customers know immediately that it is an Apple product, and it has something to do with TV or Watch. Just like "iPhone" tells you it is a phone. And not just _any_ phone, but an iPhone. There are fewer people saying "That's a clever name", but more people saying "I'll buy that".
I suggest that TalkTalk's security was so bad that several people independently performed attacks against it via SQL injections. It's like a jewellery store finding the store empty in the morning, after not closing the door over night. There are probably multiple independent people who took away as much as they could carry.
That would be a bug that happens only in a leap second. It is undefined behaviour. But whether it actually causes trouble might be depending on your compiler, so the code may have been running fine for yours, and suddenly when you recompile with a new compiler, it breaks.
If Apple iphones are working properly with time zones(daylight savings), that's only within the past two years.
The operating system has handled everything fine for a long time. The problems are in applications. For example an alarm clock that should ring an alarm every morning at 8am, but the programmer set it to ring an alarm every 24 hours. And twice a year, "24 hours later" is either 7am or 9am.
An extreme case that caused me some headache (as a user of an alarm clock): An iPad notices when you move from time zone to time zone. I was on a ship, which would cross to another time zone through the night, and I wanted to be woken up at 8am. How do you set your alarm clock? Even if the alarm clock app handles DST (which it can because it can know how long away "8am tomorrow" is), the changed time zone is not foreseeable.
Not quite. GMT and UTC differ by up to 0.9 seconds.
GMT is based on astronomy. When the earth wobbles a bit, and the time for one rotation changes a bit, GMT adapts to it. In GMT, a day always has exactly 86400 seconds, but the length of the seconds is just very, very slightly variable.
UTC is based on atomic clocks. A second in UTC has always the exact same length (as far as we can measure it, which is pretty well. But because UTC seconds are fixed length, and GMT seconds are not, they can slowly drift apart. When they get 0.9 seconds apart, we add or remove a second from the day in UTC. So while the seconds are fixed length in UTC, days are not. They can be 86401 or 85999 seconds.
Once I signed "John Doe" throughout the entire paperwork. Nobody noticed.
Careful. Signed is signed. It is the fact that you sign that makes it a contract, not the fact that you sign with your real name.
If you sign with a false name in order that you cannot be found if the other side tries to enforce the contract because they don't know who you are, that could be fraud. Obviously that wouldn't be the case here because they know who you are. But if you lied and claimed you didn't sign because it isn't your name, that would e fraud.
Some company tried to enforce that clause in The Netherlands after THEY fired someone. When it came to court, the judge ordered that they could enforce it, but then they had to pay the former employee full salary for doing nothing at home because it would prevent him from getting a job. Suddenly the clause was dropped...
That has always been the case in Germany. The result is that you have a clause that gives them the right to disallow you from working for a competitor - so they only need to pay if you find a new job and they tell you not to take it.
I don't mind that clause at all. I would have asked my next employer to put into the employment contract that I am not allowed to work for anyone else while employed, either for free or for payment, except that on request they would allow me to work for Suntrust, as long as Suntrust pays my employer $2,000 per day.
In truth, Apple is a niche player and a small minority of the market.
You keep on believing that. Apple builds about 7 percent of the worlds computers, makes about 20 percent of the revenue, and far beyond half the world wide profits from selling computer hardware.
Correct. So the kind of little Nestor who fears being different can buy this year's Apple laptop and not worry about making the grave mistake of buying the "wrong" computer and facing the scorn of his social peers. There is even a feeling of membership in owning the Apple e-meter. To do otherwise would risk having the label "unmutual" cast upon one.
Yeah, you buy the computer brand that 5 percent of the population buy to be accepted...
Everyone else is selling crap because the public cannot possibly find any difference between two Windows computers other than price, so everyone builds the cheapest computer possible which means it is crap. They can try building good expensive computers but nobody buys them because the customer isn't able to judge which computer is expensive and good and which is expensive and crap, so they rather buy something that is cheap and crap.
And Apple managed to think different and keep their prices high because their computers are _different_.
But the problem of choice, which you are not nearly smart enough to understand until it is properly explained, is that lots of choice makes it difficult to impossible to make the best possible choice. I can pick the best out of two or three jams. Nobody can pick the best out of 30 jams. So the customer with a choice of three goes home happily with the best available jam in his shopping bag, while the customer with a choice of 30 couldn't find the best one, would be unhappy with the possibility of buying the second best, and leaves without anything. Lots of choice makes it hard to make the best decision.
Slashdot Mirror
They make airplane sized scales...perhaps just build them into the taxiway and have a wireless communications to the plane of the weight.
How many times has the total weight been entered completely right? Do you think you can make the system that you propose work with a lower failure rate? Good luck.
... then you can be 100 percent sure that there wouldn't be a flag fluttering in the wind. "Hey boss, I checked the film, and the wind is making the flag move". "Don't worry, nobody will notice". Really? What kind of idiot do you have to be to believe that could happen? If there was a flag moving in the wind, the recording would have been repeated.
if he didnt see it as a threat, he would ignore it like all the other devices that compete.
Strange enough, half the Apple haters complain that Cook is an arrogant bastard because he tells the world what he thinks of this "surface book", and the other half claims that he must be afraid.
If you check the sum of digits, you find that five out of every six consecutive numbers are divisible by 2 or 3, and only one isn't. Normally two out of six numbers are not divisible by 2 or 3. That means these numbers are only half as likely as your average random number to be primes.
Normally, the probability that a random integer n is a prime number is about 1 / ln n. The probability that a random n digit number is a prime is about 1 / 2.3n. With these numbers, it is about 1 / 4.6n.
We can estimate the number of primes that we should find while adding all (0.9 * 10^k) k-digit numbers, ending with a number of (k - 1/9) * 10^9 digits: That estimate is about 0.5 + (1 / 4.6) / (k - 10/9). That's about 0.5444 for six digit numbers added, about 0.5369 for seven digit numbers, about 0.5315 for eight digit numbers. Hoping for a solution within the first million numbers is optimistic.
" that can figure out where it is even if it has no map or GPS" ... OK, I'm going to drop you off in the middle of Kentucky mountain area with no GPS and no map, leave you stranded with noone to talk to and you should just magically know where you are.... sorry but NO. Unless I had been there before (i.e. prior knowledge or.... mapping) I will have no clue where I am and will have to basically start driving in one direction (which these cars can do) until I figure out where I am.
Note that a self-driven car will almost always have GPS and now its exact location. It will just sometimes not have an accurate map of the area directly around it. Both self driven car and car driven by me will proceed to the nearest road, then make a guess which direction to turn. The difference is that the self driven care will always know where it is and what direction it is going. It can't get lost. If it returns to a place where it was before it can take that into account.
Agree. People keep bringing up this scenario, but it really is very unrealistic. If you are travelling at motorway speeds, then why is there a crowd of people near the motorway?
I was told by British police that four percent of road deaths happen on the motorway (which makes it the safest place to drive by far). Of these four percent, 20% are pedestrians. Which makes the motorway an awfully dangerous place for pedestrians.
The issue is, human drivers have a strong instinct of self-preservation. Someone who has to decide between the parade and the tree in a split second will probably avoid the tree out of sheer instinct.
Actually, the most likely thing that person would do is nothing (and the car goes wherever it goes). The second most likely thing is that the person avoids whatever is happening without action. If the car aims at people, that's the immediate danger and the driver will try to avoid that without thinking about the secondary danger of killing himself. If the car aims at the tree, that's the immediate danger and the driver will try to avoid that without thinking about the secondary danger of killing many others.
The real test of artificial intelligence will come when the self-driving vehicle will have to decide between plowing into a crowd of people to protect the driver, and smashing into a tree to protect the crowd of people - but killing the driver, when the accident is inevitable.
The real test of driver intelligence and ethics will come when the driver of a human-driven vehicle will have to decide between plowing into a crowd of people to protect himsel, and smashing into a tree to protect the crowd of people but killing himself, when the accident is inevitable.
On the other hand, if you as the driver ever allow such a situation to arise, and you plow into the crowd, you'll hopefully go to jail for a very long time.
I picked a random problem off the list called 4-sum, read it, it obviously had a solution in O (n^2 log n), and the bloody website claims O (n^3). They should be ashamed.
If that post above does't make sense, it's Slashdot rubbish treatmen of ordinary text.
So one of these clever guys says that checking whether a + b lessthan a does not correctly find all unsigned integer overflows, because of integer promotions. Dead wrong. If there are integer promotions, then there is no overflow. So a + b lessthan a is pointless because it is always false, but it _does_ correctly find all overflows. Even when there aren't any.
And fuck slashdot with its stupid ass "slow down cowboy" shit that doesn't let you post of correction of a post that was messed up by slashdot.
And Linus is right, while Hannes and Rasmus are dead wrong.
One of these clever guys says that checking whether a + b
Then they say that these macros allow to fix problems without any thinking. Dead wrong. Without thinking, every time you use these macros there is a 50% or greater chance to introduce a bug. On the other hand, if you check on theregister for Linus' replacement code, it is simple, trivial, and obviously correct.
An obvious sign of the brain damage involved is someone figuring out that they need a result of at least 8, and instead of checking "if (x 8)" they check "if (x = 7)".
There were the very widespread Motorola 68k processors, used in Macs, Atari and Amiga computers for many years, where a signed integer addition overflow definitely invoked undefined behaviour.
... }". You seem to be someone who thinks nothing could go wrong. On these processors, an integer addition set the condition flags according to the mathematical result of the operation, ignoring overflow. So "if (MAX_INT + 1 > 0)" would produce a true condition. But store the result of MAX_INT + 1 and compare the stored result with 0, and it's false because there was an overflow, giving a negative result.
Take "if (a + b > 0) {
Why do you think it would probably work? Over-the-top insults and tantrums typically don't work; it creates resistance and anger, and is a very unproductive way to deal with things.
To repeat that kind of code, you would have to argue that it was anywhere near acceptable. And you can't. I looked at the three versions of the code on theregister, and the first version is a serious bug which needed fixing, the second that the rant was about is an absolute WTF, and the third is absolutely clean and obvious and what I would expect any sane programmer to write.
Ok, this is a serious rant. If it gets you upset and you are so upset that you insist on continuing to write that kind of code, you are not only incompetent, but also childish.
Apple does have a monopoly on the Apple AppStore. So if Apple decided not to allow any apps that Amazon produces (like Amazon Shopping), then that would be a very similar abuse of Apple's power, the other direction.
"Apple AppStore" is not a category where you can have a monopoly that counts legally, because people are free to buy non-Apple phones and do so in masses. But then you are right, it is the same in the other direction.
iOS != tvOS (jeez, what an inspired name, Apple - almost as inspired as "Apple TV"...) And regardless of the APIs, it's a totally different screen/UI and input method.
Sure, there is nothing clever about the name "Apple TV". Or about "Apple Watch", for example. But potential customers know immediately that it is an Apple product, and it has something to do with TV or Watch. Just like "iPhone" tells you it is a phone. And not just _any_ phone, but an iPhone. There are fewer people saying "That's a clever name", but more people saying "I'll buy that".
I suggest that TalkTalk's security was so bad that several people independently performed attacks against it via SQL injections. It's like a jewellery store finding the store empty in the morning, after not closing the door over night. There are probably multiple independent people who took away as much as they could carry.
Just a line of C code:
if (leap_second) seconds = seconds++;
That would be a bug that happens only in a leap second. It is undefined behaviour. But whether it actually causes trouble might be depending on your compiler, so the code may have been running fine for yours, and suddenly when you recompile with a new compiler, it breaks.
If Apple iphones are working properly with time zones(daylight savings), that's only within the past two years.
The operating system has handled everything fine for a long time. The problems are in applications. For example an alarm clock that should ring an alarm every morning at 8am, but the programmer set it to ring an alarm every 24 hours. And twice a year, "24 hours later" is either 7am or 9am.
An extreme case that caused me some headache (as a user of an alarm clock): An iPad notices when you move from time zone to time zone. I was on a ship, which would cross to another time zone through the night, and I wanted to be woken up at 8am. How do you set your alarm clock? Even if the alarm clock app handles DST (which it can because it can know how long away "8am tomorrow" is), the changed time zone is not foreseeable.
GMT, aka UTC
Not quite. GMT and UTC differ by up to 0.9 seconds.
GMT is based on astronomy. When the earth wobbles a bit, and the time for one rotation changes a bit, GMT adapts to it. In GMT, a day always has exactly 86400 seconds, but the length of the seconds is just very, very slightly variable.
UTC is based on atomic clocks. A second in UTC has always the exact same length (as far as we can measure it, which is pretty well. But because UTC seconds are fixed length, and GMT seconds are not, they can slowly drift apart. When they get 0.9 seconds apart, we add or remove a second from the day in UTC. So while the seconds are fixed length in UTC, days are not. They can be 86401 or 85999 seconds.
Once I signed "John Doe" throughout the entire paperwork. Nobody noticed.
Careful. Signed is signed. It is the fact that you sign that makes it a contract, not the fact that you sign with your real name.
If you sign with a false name in order that you cannot be found if the other side tries to enforce the contract because they don't know who you are, that could be fraud. Obviously that wouldn't be the case here because they know who you are. But if you lied and claimed you didn't sign because it isn't your name, that would e fraud.
Some company tried to enforce that clause in The Netherlands after THEY fired someone. When it came to court, the judge ordered that they could enforce it, but then they had to pay the former employee full salary for doing nothing at home because it would prevent him from getting a job. Suddenly the clause was dropped...
That has always been the case in Germany. The result is that you have a clause that gives them the right to disallow you from working for a competitor - so they only need to pay if you find a new job and they tell you not to take it.
I don't mind that clause at all. I would have asked my next employer to put into the employment contract that I am not allowed to work for anyone else while employed, either for free or for payment, except that on request they would allow me to work for Suntrust, as long as Suntrust pays my employer $2,000 per day.
I'd say that is quite reasonable.
In truth, Apple is a niche player and a small minority of the market.
You keep on believing that. Apple builds about 7 percent of the worlds computers, makes about 20 percent of the revenue, and far beyond half the world wide profits from selling computer hardware.
Correct. So the kind of little Nestor who fears being different can buy this year's Apple laptop and not worry about making the grave mistake of buying the "wrong" computer and facing the scorn of his social peers. There is even a feeling of membership in owning the Apple e-meter. To do otherwise would risk having the label "unmutual" cast upon one.
Yeah, you buy the computer brand that 5 percent of the population buy to be accepted...
Everyone else is selling crap because the public cannot possibly find any difference between two Windows computers other than price, so everyone builds the cheapest computer possible which means it is crap. They can try building good expensive computers but nobody buys them because the customer isn't able to judge which computer is expensive and good and which is expensive and crap, so they rather buy something that is cheap and crap.
And Apple managed to think different and keep their prices high because their computers are _different_.
But the problem of choice, which you are not nearly smart enough to understand until it is properly explained, is that lots of choice makes it difficult to impossible to make the best possible choice. I can pick the best out of two or three jams. Nobody can pick the best out of 30 jams. So the customer with a choice of three goes home happily with the best available jam in his shopping bag, while the customer with a choice of 30 couldn't find the best one, would be unhappy with the possibility of buying the second best, and leaves without anything. Lots of choice makes it hard to make the best decision.
So you don't really like having lots of choices for jellies. You like having _some_ good ones.