Engineers are also often unable to get the message across or do not even notice that it has not gotten across. As a technology consultant, this skill is about as important, if not more, than your engineering skills. I once heard a talk by a lobbyist on how to talk to politicians (a real eye-opener). The same applies here: Do not say it "could have a thermal runaway event", say "it will explode". Do not say "this could create a vulnerability", say "if you do that, somebody will attack you successfully, and it will be very embarrassing, as the mistake is on amateur-level". Do not say "we may have a small number of failures", say "we will have some very angry customers, because the device will have failed on them". And so on.
If you still do not get the message across, make sure all your warnings are documented in writing and make sure the people you warned know these are documented. That way, it it will be much harder to make you the scape-goat _and_ the stupid manager will see that _you_ are preparing for the failure already. For some, that will finally make them listen. Of course, if you regularly get not through and you are pretty sure you did everything you reasonably could (no, going to the press is not an option, that will kill your career permanently), look for a better job.
As these are well-tested and established design best practices, they carry a lot of weight to any actual engineer. The thinking you demonstrate here is exactly what lead to this fiasco and likely what Samsung management did: "Oh, we need a 0.5mm gap here? You don't say. Lets omit it to make the phone thinner and try it out on a 10 phones or so for a week. No problem found? Let's run with it." Result: Epic fail. Design on very low amateur-level.
There were. This is about pressure compromising them, because the pressure was far higher than they were designed to withstand. Samsung screwed up extremely, but not that extremely.
Any sane design process includes an independent design review. I do this regularly for software security aspects. Electronics engineering done right is no different, especially when you are going to produce so many units and so much rides on them. Sure, if it is just a non-critical component, that cannot do much damage and is produced in small numbers, you can verify the design by just trying it out, but not in cases like the Galaxy Note 7. Not having that design review, using people that are not competent or ignoring the results is a huge management failure.
Management failure. First, they likely overruled engineering and second, they likely hired engineers that did not protest enough and/or were not able to explain to management that this could not go well. And it seems pretty much like this design would have failed in any case, no way around that. Stupid and arrogance combined, like in so many cases when things really go wrong.
Good analogy. Yes, I think that is what is going on and I expect MS is both training some rather large classifiers as well as looks at any outliers manually.
And in a nutshell, that is the problem. The other problem is that systemd really has some bad design-decision in there, because its creators lack experience and insight. The same is true in spades for Windows, but that does not make it fine in Linux.
Interestingly, despite being in CS for now 30 years and doing some quite algorithm-intensive and complicated work even today, the only time I consulted them was for an exercise in CS 101 that referenced something in there. I have always found easier to read and better references, quite a few of them research papers. Don't get me wrong: I think it is good that they exist, but they are more a reference for fundamental research than a handbook for an engineer or applied scientist.
Because that could be done with a fairly small number of users, no need to spy on all of them. Anyways, while I would pay money for Win10, it would have to be the LTSB-version, because spying can be fully turned off and no new "features" all the time. As at the moment there seems to be no way to get LTSB as private user or small business, I will stay on Win7 for anything that needs Windows (Office, gaming) and try to move everything else to Linux, where I at least have control over what gets sent to the distro (nothing). In the worst case I will get a gaming-only PC with Win10 (no email, no browsing, no work) in a few years, jail Office in a no-network Win7 VM and do everything else on Linux.
You can fork systemd, except you don't have a team to help you and a company to pay you, so in practice, you can't really.
I do not need to. I can use sysIV init. It is finished, reliable, reasonable fast. No need for maintenance. And in the same venue, I find that packaged that need boot-scripts but do not support sysIV init are not worth using anyways.
This is the worst ever suppression of human nature and if this is not sexually motivated abuse of underage youth, I do not know what is. This person is obviously a dangerous pervert.
Well, yes. Fortunately I use not one of the technologies in your list (with the exception of a small number of applications using gtk+, all of them replaceable by others), but the "normal" Linux user begins to be screwed almost as badly as a Windows-user.
So you think the majority of Muslims are politicians that run countries? With that level of insight, it is a wonder if you can put your pants on by yourself, Here is a hint: "Leaders" are bad _anywhere_. Just look at whom the US recently voted into power...
Indeed. Next step is that Muslims will have to wear a crescent moon visible on the top clothing and then it is concentration camps and gas chambers. Whatever you think of Trump otherwise, this idea alone disqualifies him from wielding power of any kind, he just does not understand the concept of ethics and has no insight into human history. Especially as a majority of Muslims are decent people that place respecting others above their religion. Of course, with any large group of people, even if there are just a few bad apples in relative numbers, it can be a large number in absolutes. It is however completely unacceptable to punish the decent majority for the bad minority.
Actually they cannot. Not even today, and it does not look like they could be anytime soon. The meaning of "programming" is changing a bit, admittedly, and it becomes a bit more high-level, but that is it.
Slashdot Mirror
Engineers are also often unable to get the message across or do not even notice that it has not gotten across. As a technology consultant, this skill is about as important, if not more, than your engineering skills. I once heard a talk by a lobbyist on how to talk to politicians (a real eye-opener). The same applies here: Do not say it "could have a thermal runaway event", say "it will explode". Do not say "this could create a vulnerability", say "if you do that, somebody will attack you successfully, and it will be very embarrassing, as the mistake is on amateur-level". Do not say "we may have a small number of failures", say "we will have some very angry customers, because the device will have failed on them". And so on.
If you still do not get the message across, make sure all your warnings are documented in writing and make sure the people you warned know these are documented. That way, it it will be much harder to make you the scape-goat _and_ the stupid manager will see that _you_ are preparing for the failure already. For some, that will finally make them listen. Of course, if you regularly get not through and you are pretty sure you did everything you reasonably could (no, going to the press is not an option, that will kill your career permanently), look for a better job.
A) the worst (fire) still happens rarely and
B) It takes time to happen (the battery expanding)
If you do not understand the problem (and Samsung very likely did not on the decision-layer), you cannot design a test for it.
As these are well-tested and established design best practices, they carry a lot of weight to any actual engineer. The thinking you demonstrate here is exactly what lead to this fiasco and likely what Samsung management did: "Oh, we need a 0.5mm gap here? You don't say. Lets omit it to make the phone thinner and try it out on a 10 phones or so for a week. No problem found? Let's run with it." Result: Epic fail. Design on very low amateur-level.
There were. This is about pressure compromising them, because the pressure was far higher than they were designed to withstand. Samsung screwed up extremely, but not that extremely.
Any sane design process includes an independent design review. I do this regularly for software security aspects. Electronics engineering done right is no different, especially when you are going to produce so many units and so much rides on them. Sure, if it is just a non-critical component, that cannot do much damage and is produced in small numbers, you can verify the design by just trying it out, but not in cases like the Galaxy Note 7. Not having that design review, using people that are not competent or ignoring the results is a huge management failure.
Management failure. First, they likely overruled engineering and second, they likely hired engineers that did not protest enough and/or were not able to explain to management that this could not go well. And it seems pretty much like this design would have failed in any case, no way around that. Stupid and arrogance combined, like in so many cases when things really go wrong.
And fail. Reinstalling will not fix the issue.
I have. But while a gaming PC being sabotaged by MS is annoying, it is not critical.
For a time, yes. Ultimately, such a strategy is suicide though.
Good analogy. Yes, I think that is what is going on and I expect MS is both training some rather large classifiers as well as looks at any outliers manually.
And in a nutshell, that is the problem. The other problem is that systemd really has some bad design-decision in there, because its creators lack experience and insight. The same is true in spades for Windows, but that does not make it fine in Linux.
Interestingly, despite being in CS for now 30 years and doing some quite algorithm-intensive and complicated work even today, the only time I consulted them was for an exercise in CS 101 that referenced something in there. I have always found easier to read and better references, quite a few of them research papers. Don't get me wrong: I think it is good that they exist, but they are more a reference for fundamental research than a handbook for an engineer or applied scientist.
Hahahaha, funny! Sorry, do not have mod-points, but this is sarcasm done extremely well!
Because that could be done with a fairly small number of users, no need to spy on all of them. Anyways, while I would pay money for Win10, it would have to be the LTSB-version, because spying can be fully turned off and no new "features" all the time. As at the moment there seems to be no way to get LTSB as private user or small business, I will stay on Win7 for anything that needs Windows (Office, gaming) and try to move everything else to Linux, where I at least have control over what gets sent to the distro (nothing). In the worst case I will get a gaming-only PC with Win10 (no email, no browsing, no work) in a few years, jail Office in a no-network Win7 VM and do everything else on Linux.
While you are right in the technical side, combine pattern recognition with an over-eager and stupid prosecutor to get the outcome I described.
You can fork systemd, except you don't have a team to help you and a company to pay you, so in practice, you can't really.
I do not need to. I can use sysIV init. It is finished, reliable, reasonable fast. No need for maintenance. And in the same venue, I find that packaged that need boot-scripts but do not support sysIV init are not worth using anyways.
Because that will make it true, right?
This is the worst ever suppression of human nature and if this is not sexually motivated abuse of underage youth, I do not know what is. This person is obviously a dangerous pervert.
Well, yes. Fortunately I use not one of the technologies in your list (with the exception of a small number of applications using gtk+, all of them replaceable by others), but the "normal" Linux user begins to be screwed almost as badly as a Windows-user.
Unfortunately, that is very likely.
Ok, that may waste time. Everybody knows that reinstalling is the way to go on boot-problems, right?
What "speed benefit"?
So you think the majority of Muslims are politicians that run countries? With that level of insight, it is a wonder if you can put your pants on by yourself,
Here is a hint: "Leaders" are bad _anywhere_. Just look at whom the US recently voted into power...
Indeed. Next step is that Muslims will have to wear a crescent moon visible on the top clothing and then it is concentration camps and gas chambers. Whatever you think of Trump otherwise, this idea alone disqualifies him from wielding power of any kind, he just does not understand the concept of ethics and has no insight into human history. Especially as a majority of Muslims are decent people that place respecting others above their religion. Of course, with any large group of people, even if there are just a few bad apples in relative numbers, it can be a large number in absolutes. It is however completely unacceptable to punish the decent majority for the bad minority.
Actually they cannot. Not even today, and it does not look like they could be anytime soon. The meaning of "programming" is changing a bit, admittedly, and it becomes a bit more high-level, but that is it.
Indeed. All these "capitalists" have not found out about one of the fundamentals of capitalism yet. Stupid.