I dislike the "we could use this to fix our infrastructure" argument.
I would be closer to being rich if I got your salary in addition to my own. My guess is that our respective employers have a reason for paying you for what you do, and not paying me double for doing more of what I do.
We should spend money on infrastructure, but we need to be careful here and understand that there is a mission that needs to be completed.
My problem with the F-35 isn't that I don't believe in the mission, it's that the F-35 costs too much to not fulfill its mission parameters. I don't have a problem with a 1 trillion dollar fighter if we need one and it does what it needs to do.
If there is waste in that program, it needs to be dealt with, but we're going to need a fifth generation strike aircraft from somewhere. I like the A-10, but it does have its disadvantages as well. It is meant for busting Soviet tanks in Central Europe, and that makes it superlative at ground support, but it is extremely specialized at that. We either choose a new plane or keep the old one, but we can't do both. And my vote is for the new one, as long as it works.
Let's not get caught by history again. Yeah, we're fighting bush wars now. This isn't the end of history. It is very possible for us to fight a modern war against top level opponents in the future. China is working hard to become that kind of threat. They're behind, but they won't always be, especially if we keep looking back.
Albert Speer did a pretty damn good job of ramping up German production after 1943. The Germans were producing more tanks in 1944 than they did in 1941. What killed the Germans was that they were too slow to ramp up, their designs were superior in many ways, but very, very touchy, and they completely lost air superiority. Also, they tried to fight a two front war. Actually, a more than two front war. Oh, and their form of government was based on overlapping responsibilities for high ranking Nazis which was more for keeping anyone from overthrowing Hitler than it was for any sort of efficiency.
The Panthers and Tigers would have been probably better off scaled back, or at least, designed with less complicated components. It would have helped a lot, but it is hard to see how Germany could have taken on both the US and USSR at the same time. Quantity does have a quality all its own.
China has been very canny about how they do things. Their deals generally are done in such a way as to make sure their own people get not only licenses to build products, but also that their own people are trained how to make them, and the factories are built in China.
Yes, they're playing copycat and have been for decades, but they're also amassing actual experience which they are starting to use to build some new things.
This is where we will see if China can move forward while maintaining its particular brand of not-Communism and top-down rule by a Party elite. If someone else is giving you the plans and training you can build anything. If you have to be creative and think outside of the box, that could cause issues for a country where the centre wants to maintain control.
The Chinese, like any other humans, have the capability to succeed and be creative and not just be copycats. The only reason they would not be would be due to either their government or culture, or both. If they can do all of that in spite of those things, then you may find Western democracy might be given a run for its money on its own turf.
Well if you're in Salesforce, when you are working with a sales person, they open what is called an "Opportunity". It's a document used to track the progress of a potential sale through the pipeline.
If I was a sales guy, I might have a customer who has just decided to order the 1 TB storage upgrade to Application X, which the customer already owns. The sales rep opens a new opportunity for the prospective purchase, links the existing customer information to it and tracks that through to the end.
Someone like a CEO would run their own reports based on how all of the company's opportunities look on a regular basis, especially deals which are at-risk of not closing, so this all makes sense in context. Generally your sales forecasting is provided by creating reports based on your opportunities and the tracking information within. A percentage is assigned to an opportunity to show how far it has gone, with 100% being Closed Won.
tl;dr, it's a sales opportunity tracking ticket in Salesforce. Which is probably why he was using that lingo at a Salesforce conference. Presumably Cortana would have had access to his Salesforce accounts somehow. Or, more likely, a fake account with humorous "at-risk" customers like Apple and Google or something.
I'm not totally against Java, but having worked with it since it was released 20 or so years ago, I note that Java was touted as a language/VM/bytecode/whatever where you didn't need to worry about memory management aside from some tuning.
The reality is that Java saves you from having to write your own MM, but that's only helpful if their memory manager is actually better than something you could have written for yourself. Initially, the MM was nowhere near as good as it is today, although it was clearly "adequate". Still, you can do better even today, if you wanted to put the time into it.
What happened is that, for years, we just got used to restarting java apps when they acted poorly, and Operations threw up their hands and gave up trying to get development to actually catch exceptions when they were thrown. Logs full of unhandled exceptions have been normal for more than a decade now.
Java does have good points in comparison to C, but it is very easy to code junk in Java that works enough so that it gets released, which increases productivity, at the cost of well designed applications. That's why it is so popular, especially with the business.
The Navy is a big organization made up of a fairly diverse set of military and civilian types. While nothing specific is stopping the Navy from continuing to test it, chances are, someone would report that and heads would eventually roll. They could try and classify it, but once it is known to be illegal, any order to cover up such a test would be an illegal order and no member of the military would be bound to comply with it.
And chances are good, the figured out a way to test it in another manner.
Fear not. If war broke out, those sonar would be pinging their hearts out no matter what some judge said.
Efficiency can only get you so far. You use enough energy, you will get waste heat as entropy, and entropy is inescapable. Of course, they might use hyperspatial redirection or subspace quantum oscillation phase modulation or something to make it look different to us or send it to another pocket dimension, but chances are, we'd have some indication of a Type III civilization.
What we should really be calling the summary out on is the fact that they equate a Type III civilization with an "advanced civilization". Yeah, it's advanced all right, but the bloody United Federation of Planets would only be something like a Type II. You have to control the energy output of an *entire galaxy* to be a Type III.
Which is pretty sweet, and exactly what Tesla wants.
Tesla wants the competition in the market. They won't be able to put enough money together to make electric cars into the "new normal" by themselves. For that, they need a lot of competitors who are producing enough volume to make EVs something that you see everywhere.
Once it hits a certain tipping point, the market will start supporting EVs as more than just toys. At that point, the goal of mass adoption could turn EVs into a replacement for gasoline vehicles which means that now Tesla makes more money due to increased volume over all. And being the owner of a great deal of production capacity for these sorts of vehicles, this means they have a head start on everyone else.
It won't be enough to make Tesla completely dominant in the EV market, but it could propel them into a top spot in a New Electric Vehicle Order. More to the point, it would turn them into a real honest to goodness car company, and not just an expensive vanity project.
Or to put it more succinctly, a rising tide lifts all ships. Any work that anyone does to support EVs or dedicate production capacity to EVs will help Tesla out too. Just like they're helping out everyone else by releasing their patents and building infrastructure.
Most of the cuts will occur in HP’s long-troubled Enterprise Services unit and may be offset by new hires in that unit. The head of the group, Mike Nefkens, outlined a plan under which it is cutting jobs in what he called “high-cost countries” and moving them to low-cost countries.
Many companies have layoffs but they don't disappear. The reason is that the layoffs aren't "reductions in force", they are mass firings of people who are expensive due to seniority or bad negotiations from better times. The company then turns around and hires almost the same number of people, but at a lower rate.
This is frequently done by going to cheaper countries (which is what Nefkins is actually quoted here as saying), which means that this is effectively equivalent to an outsourcing. Either they will really outsource those jobs, or they will hire people in "outsource-worthy" labor markets. That makes this an outsource in all but name and perhaps organizational detail.
I can accept that some of the churches will use and direct hatred, but at the same time, I think that's a cop-out. It is mostly fear and a lack of understanding. In other words, ignorance.
The fundamentalists purport to derive direct meaning for everything from books that ceased having original content added around AD 120. Those books may have universal moral and ethical lessons, but I never read about Jesus giving a science lesson.
Oddly, back in the day it was an innovation to follow the Bible without the directed interpretation of the Magisterium. It allowed people to connect to the words and face down those in the upper echelons of the Church who claimed that they made the rules, no matter how far from the original they strayed.
Unfortunately, there is a reason that a magisterium develops, whether it be in religion or science.... most people have no idea what they are talking about. And that is the problem here. Where the Catholic church can reason its way out of reactionary attitudes to science (eventually), the fundamentalists cannot. And that is because they eschew analysis and interpretation. You are merely viewing the fear of the ignorant when exposed to ideas they can't accept, no matter how appealing or accepted by others. They can't understand that it isn't black and white.
He did say "many churches have done so", which is vague, but is more or less accurate. There are a number of churches that accept evolution. There are others that don't.
I suppose you could dispute what "many" means, but I don't know why you'd bother, it's not like he said "all religions".
Yeah, but people who blow up trucks full of fertilizer are trying to kill people where they feel safe or to make a statement. Blowing up data centers doesn't make real news. All you've done is killed at best a dozen people and made everyone there activate their DR plan.
That's why they shoot up elementary schools and kill people on the news even though they could have used that to knock out the electrical grid or something. The news thrives on sentimentality and human interest pieces. And the crazies crave news coverage.
We know the SM is incomplete. But we have a very good idea where we'd have to go to find the answers.
There's a difference between not knowing something because you have no idea where to look, and not knowing something because you know where to look, but you can't get there.
You might have a map leading to a horde of gold somewhere on Mount Everest. You have good coordinates and everything. Still, good luck actually trying to confirm that in person, let alone collecting it without a massive undertaking.
And the suggestion that 100 million TeV couldn't be produced with a smasher that girded the Equator means we would have to do a *lot* better than current technology to make such a device because then we're talking about building megastructres in space as being almost the only option from then on.
While I agree with you to some extent, the fact is that it isn't going to be a matter of whether we're missing say 1% or 37% of the energy at the LHC we need to make a breakthrough. The theories and models in question provide only certain situations that you might find new particles, which is likely the basis for what this article is saying.
In other words, its like having a road map that shows a freeway and all of its exits, but we otherwise have no idea where we are on that map. If the next exit is 2 miles from the previous exit, then chances are good we are in this one place on the map with lots of exits. However, if there are no exits even after 10 miles of driving, then the map shows us that we are most likely in this one rural area that doesn't have an exit for 100 miles.
In this case, mathematics and theoretical physics provides us the map with all the possible places you could find particles. Now we have to determine where we are on that map by finding where the next particle is to be found. If it is at LHC energies, then our map says we're likely to find a some new particles with minimal increments of further energy use. If it isn't, then we know we've hit the "rural" area on the map and we won't be seeing another particle for a long, long time because we need an particle smasher the size of the solar system to hit those energies.
Of course, brand spanking new physics could alter the "roadmap", but since the Standard Model does predict *just about* everything we have seen in experiments, then it means our physics is still incomplete, but has become accurate enough that we can predict what would happen down to the place we'd need the hundred million TeV to see anything new or to answer the specific items that the Standard Model does leave open.
When does a "security company" not understand that you don't run a webserver as root? Just about every distro's webserver package will make a webserver run as a non-root user by default. These guys not only overlooked the fact that their webserver was running as root, they probably rolled their own web server install to begin with to even make that possible.
As someone else pointed out, they must have used lawyers to protect their data, because they clearly didn't employ any system administrators.
It is mostly a problem if the person doesn't know about this password hack happening. At least some of the people who signed up for that site probably don't understand the full threat and aren't following tech news.
It's also a problem if there are accounts that this user has forgotten they had, but which use the same password.
You probably shouldn't get modded down. Some of my fine CS and engineering compatriots have attended schools founded by Robber Barons and financiers of another age. Bill Gates isn't even the worst of that set, although perhaps the richest.
Bill Gates may have been an unscrupulous businessman who is even now, somehow doing wrong while at the same time, donating to charity, but I wouldn't argue with taking his money if it got the job done.
I agree that you don't need a computer to learn English lit. I had some access to computers in my school, but mostly everything was books and paper. They did make me type all my papers after a certain point, though, so typing papers is a far-from-new phenomenon.
However, computers are becoming so pervasive for everything these days that I think relying on only a "computer class" to integrate the practical use of computers just isn't going to cut it if these students want to deal with the realities of life in the 21st Century in the US. Everything is going online and eventually everyone will need to use a computer for something. This is a different world than I grew up in, and as I look at my parents, struggling through using computers, the last thing I want to do is manufacture more people who are less proficient with them in the name of good old book learning.
Textbooks are extremely expensive as well, and while they may be readable for a long time, they certainly can become obsolete and completely lack interactivity. I think schools should be able to provide enough computers for the use of their students. I know that certain teachers sometimes turn these computers into playthings, and for that, I think we need someone to take a good look at where and when computers are appropriate. But make no mistake, they are quite simply the replacement for libraries and typewriters, being more functional and much more convenient than either..Librarians themselves are not outdated, but card catalogs and the Dewey Decimal system alone just aren't cutting it any more.
If anything, I'd turn the library into rows of desks with computers on them and have librarians spend their time finding online resources to curate and add to an "online school library" which can be research source with better provenance than the general Internet. I love books, and they have their own virtues, but they also have serious limitations. They certainly should remain in some form, and an English class is probably the best place for them to remain permanently, but textbooks in general just have portability to speak for them, and today, not even that now that lightweight tablets and laptops are out there. My full-on laptop today weighs as much as just one textbook (of many) that I used to lug around and can contain by itself, copies of every textbook I have ever used, with a lot of spare room. And that's ignoring the internet.
The real problem with the Internet is that it can be difficult to use it as a trustworthy reference resource, but that can be overcome by developing a standard set of resources online.
I don't want to over-do my enthusiasm for computers in school. Time and time again, they get used as toys by teachers who don't know how to use them, and enthusiasts who become teachers and end up teaching more about computers than the subject at hand. However, they do represent progress in how information can be shared, produced and distributed and cannot be ignored in any school that is trying to do more than simply impart basic literacy and McDonald's worker skills.
There may be a line for computers in the library. Not to mention that you could open more WiFi areas in school where more computers allows more access for more people at once.
But, aside from areas like school, you have a point. Internet access would be necessary, and while there are programs and clever ways of obtaining said access, that access cannot be assumed.
Of course, back when I was young, you needed to go to libraries to do your papers because the Internet was a big research project, so it may not be too much to ask for the kids to go to the library to do their work. Not as convenient as going home, but perhaps less distraction. I know I always did good work in the library when I could make myself go there. Obviously, competition for school computers would be a problem, and this is where this project might come in handy.
The teacher would just have to not be a jerk about making the project parameters be set up in such a way that having to use a library or other communal space for Internet access be a huge disadvantage.
We can already make industrial quantities of wine and other beverages, and yet there are still people who will pay a stupid amount of money for wines and spirits that have been "aged" in a certain way or combined with exotic ingredients like "glacier water from the Himalayas".
So, it is easy to see how farmers could stay in business with actual cows, albeit not in direct competition with industrial farms because industrial farming will be dead and replaced by industrial vat protein production.
The traditional farmers just play up "better flavor", the hint of elitism, and of course, the idea that somehow doing it the non-vat way is more "friendly" to the environment, "organic", and "green". It will be an interesting and probably sad day for me when a real filet goes from $40 in a restaurant to $200, but that's probably how farmers will remain in business.
Many dog personality traits are certainly the products of their environment. You might be able to replicate those experiences in a general sense to get more or less the same effect, but that would require years of training. And the dog would likely not have any of the less desirable, but individual traits that made him or her unique. In some cases the dog would be "better", but that might well generate a "Stepford dog".
In any event, considering all the work that goes into generating a personality, why bother? The worst thing I could imagine would be cloning some dogs while there are perfectly good rescue dogs waiting for adoption. Or just get some new puppies. Make some new friends.
Losing a pet permanently is a teaching experience in life that shows you how to move on and deal with death. Unless you really were somehow saving the original Rover from death via brain download or something, I don't think a cloned pet is a good idea.
Look up the case and see if you are a member of the Class. Actually, you will probably be contacted if you are a member of the Class and given the option to accept the settlement and extinguish your right to sue yourself, or you can refuse the settlement and keep your right to sue independently. So make sure Intel knows where to find you.
If it is as much as $6k, I'd join the class unless you have the savings to hire a high powered legal team. The Intel corporate lawyers will own you otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
I dislike the "we could use this to fix our infrastructure" argument.
I would be closer to being rich if I got your salary in addition to my own. My guess is that our respective employers have a reason for paying you for what you do, and not paying me double for doing more of what I do.
We should spend money on infrastructure, but we need to be careful here and understand that there is a mission that needs to be completed.
My problem with the F-35 isn't that I don't believe in the mission, it's that the F-35 costs too much to not fulfill its mission parameters. I don't have a problem with a 1 trillion dollar fighter if we need one and it does what it needs to do.
If there is waste in that program, it needs to be dealt with, but we're going to need a fifth generation strike aircraft from somewhere. I like the A-10, but it does have its disadvantages as well. It is meant for busting Soviet tanks in Central Europe, and that makes it superlative at ground support, but it is extremely specialized at that. We either choose a new plane or keep the old one, but we can't do both. And my vote is for the new one, as long as it works.
Let's not get caught by history again. Yeah, we're fighting bush wars now. This isn't the end of history. It is very possible for us to fight a modern war against top level opponents in the future. China is working hard to become that kind of threat. They're behind, but they won't always be, especially if we keep looking back.
Albert Speer did a pretty damn good job of ramping up German production after 1943. The Germans were producing more tanks in 1944 than they did in 1941. What killed the Germans was that they were too slow to ramp up, their designs were superior in many ways, but very, very touchy, and they completely lost air superiority. Also, they tried to fight a two front war. Actually, a more than two front war. Oh, and their form of government was based on overlapping responsibilities for high ranking Nazis which was more for keeping anyone from overthrowing Hitler than it was for any sort of efficiency.
The Panthers and Tigers would have been probably better off scaled back, or at least, designed with less complicated components. It would have helped a lot, but it is hard to see how Germany could have taken on both the US and USSR at the same time. Quantity does have a quality all its own.
That is starting to change.
China has been very canny about how they do things. Their deals generally are done in such a way as to make sure their own people get not only licenses to build products, but also that their own people are trained how to make them, and the factories are built in China.
Yes, they're playing copycat and have been for decades, but they're also amassing actual experience which they are starting to use to build some new things.
This is where we will see if China can move forward while maintaining its particular brand of not-Communism and top-down rule by a Party elite. If someone else is giving you the plans and training you can build anything. If you have to be creative and think outside of the box, that could cause issues for a country where the centre wants to maintain control.
The Chinese, like any other humans, have the capability to succeed and be creative and not just be copycats. The only reason they would not be would be due to either their government or culture, or both. If they can do all of that in spite of those things, then you may find Western democracy might be given a run for its money on its own turf.
It's not that bad. But think of it this way, this is a sales and marketing tool, so they're really just torturing themselves.
Well if you're in Salesforce, when you are working with a sales person, they open what is called an "Opportunity". It's a document used to track the progress of a potential sale through the pipeline.
If I was a sales guy, I might have a customer who has just decided to order the 1 TB storage upgrade to Application X, which the customer already owns. The sales rep opens a new opportunity for the prospective purchase, links the existing customer information to it and tracks that through to the end.
Someone like a CEO would run their own reports based on how all of the company's opportunities look on a regular basis, especially deals which are at-risk of not closing, so this all makes sense in context. Generally your sales forecasting is provided by creating reports based on your opportunities and the tracking information within. A percentage is assigned to an opportunity to show how far it has gone, with 100% being Closed Won.
tl;dr, it's a sales opportunity tracking ticket in Salesforce. Which is probably why he was using that lingo at a Salesforce conference. Presumably Cortana would have had access to his Salesforce accounts somehow. Or, more likely, a fake account with humorous "at-risk" customers like Apple and Google or something.
I'm not totally against Java, but having worked with it since it was released 20 or so years ago, I note that Java was touted as a language/VM/bytecode/whatever where you didn't need to worry about memory management aside from some tuning.
The reality is that Java saves you from having to write your own MM, but that's only helpful if their memory manager is actually better than something you could have written for yourself. Initially, the MM was nowhere near as good as it is today, although it was clearly "adequate". Still, you can do better even today, if you wanted to put the time into it.
What happened is that, for years, we just got used to restarting java apps when they acted poorly, and Operations threw up their hands and gave up trying to get development to actually catch exceptions when they were thrown. Logs full of unhandled exceptions have been normal for more than a decade now.
Java does have good points in comparison to C, but it is very easy to code junk in Java that works enough so that it gets released, which increases productivity, at the cost of well designed applications. That's why it is so popular, especially with the business.
The Navy is a big organization made up of a fairly diverse set of military and civilian types. While nothing specific is stopping the Navy from continuing to test it, chances are, someone would report that and heads would eventually roll. They could try and classify it, but once it is known to be illegal, any order to cover up such a test would be an illegal order and no member of the military would be bound to comply with it.
And chances are good, the figured out a way to test it in another manner.
Fear not. If war broke out, those sonar would be pinging their hearts out no matter what some judge said.
Efficiency can only get you so far. You use enough energy, you will get waste heat as entropy, and entropy is inescapable. Of course, they might use hyperspatial redirection or subspace quantum oscillation phase modulation or something to make it look different to us or send it to another pocket dimension, but chances are, we'd have some indication of a Type III civilization.
What we should really be calling the summary out on is the fact that they equate a Type III civilization with an "advanced civilization". Yeah, it's advanced all right, but the bloody United Federation of Planets would only be something like a Type II. You have to control the energy output of an *entire galaxy* to be a Type III.
Which is pretty sweet, and exactly what Tesla wants.
Tesla wants the competition in the market. They won't be able to put enough money together to make electric cars into the "new normal" by themselves. For that, they need a lot of competitors who are producing enough volume to make EVs something that you see everywhere.
Once it hits a certain tipping point, the market will start supporting EVs as more than just toys. At that point, the goal of mass adoption could turn EVs into a replacement for gasoline vehicles which means that now Tesla makes more money due to increased volume over all. And being the owner of a great deal of production capacity for these sorts of vehicles, this means they have a head start on everyone else.
It won't be enough to make Tesla completely dominant in the EV market, but it could propel them into a top spot in a New Electric Vehicle Order. More to the point, it would turn them into a real honest to goodness car company, and not just an expensive vanity project.
Or to put it more succinctly, a rising tide lifts all ships. Any work that anyone does to support EVs or dedicate production capacity to EVs will help Tesla out too. Just like they're helping out everyone else by releasing their patents and building infrastructure.
Here's more of the article around the cuts:
Most of the cuts will occur in HP’s long-troubled Enterprise Services unit and may be offset by new hires in that unit. The head of the group, Mike Nefkens, outlined a plan under which it is cutting jobs in what he called “high-cost countries” and moving them to low-cost countries.
Many companies have layoffs but they don't disappear. The reason is that the layoffs aren't "reductions in force", they are mass firings of people who are expensive due to seniority or bad negotiations from better times. The company then turns around and hires almost the same number of people, but at a lower rate.
This is frequently done by going to cheaper countries (which is what Nefkins is actually quoted here as saying), which means that this is effectively equivalent to an outsourcing. Either they will really outsource those jobs, or they will hire people in "outsource-worthy" labor markets. That makes this an outsource in all but name and perhaps organizational detail.
I can accept that some of the churches will use and direct hatred, but at the same time, I think that's a cop-out. It is mostly fear and a lack of understanding. In other words, ignorance.
The fundamentalists purport to derive direct meaning for everything from books that ceased having original content added around AD 120. Those books may have universal moral and ethical lessons, but I never read about Jesus giving a science lesson.
Oddly, back in the day it was an innovation to follow the Bible without the directed interpretation of the Magisterium. It allowed people to connect to the words and face down those in the upper echelons of the Church who claimed that they made the rules, no matter how far from the original they strayed.
Unfortunately, there is a reason that a magisterium develops, whether it be in religion or science.... most people have no idea what they are talking about. And that is the problem here. Where the Catholic church can reason its way out of reactionary attitudes to science (eventually), the fundamentalists cannot. And that is because they eschew analysis and interpretation. You are merely viewing the fear of the ignorant when exposed to ideas they can't accept, no matter how appealing or accepted by others. They can't understand that it isn't black and white.
He did say "many churches have done so", which is vague, but is more or less accurate. There are a number of churches that accept evolution. There are others that don't.
I suppose you could dispute what "many" means, but I don't know why you'd bother, it's not like he said "all religions".
Yeah, but people who blow up trucks full of fertilizer are trying to kill people where they feel safe or to make a statement. Blowing up data centers doesn't make real news. All you've done is killed at best a dozen people and made everyone there activate their DR plan.
That's why they shoot up elementary schools and kill people on the news even though they could have used that to knock out the electrical grid or something. The news thrives on sentimentality and human interest pieces. And the crazies crave news coverage.
We know the SM is incomplete. But we have a very good idea where we'd have to go to find the answers.
There's a difference between not knowing something because you have no idea where to look, and not knowing something because you know where to look, but you can't get there.
You might have a map leading to a horde of gold somewhere on Mount Everest. You have good coordinates and everything. Still, good luck actually trying to confirm that in person, let alone collecting it without a massive undertaking.
Well they did say with current technology...
And the suggestion that 100 million TeV couldn't be produced with a smasher that girded the Equator means we would have to do a *lot* better than current technology to make such a device because then we're talking about building megastructres in space as being almost the only option from then on.
While I agree with you to some extent, the fact is that it isn't going to be a matter of whether we're missing say 1% or 37% of the energy at the LHC we need to make a breakthrough. The theories and models in question provide only certain situations that you might find new particles, which is likely the basis for what this article is saying.
In other words, its like having a road map that shows a freeway and all of its exits, but we otherwise have no idea where we are on that map. If the next exit is 2 miles from the previous exit, then chances are good we are in this one place on the map with lots of exits. However, if there are no exits even after 10 miles of driving, then the map shows us that we are most likely in this one rural area that doesn't have an exit for 100 miles.
In this case, mathematics and theoretical physics provides us the map with all the possible places you could find particles. Now we have to determine where we are on that map by finding where the next particle is to be found. If it is at LHC energies, then our map says we're likely to find a some new particles with minimal increments of further energy use. If it isn't, then we know we've hit the "rural" area on the map and we won't be seeing another particle for a long, long time because we need an particle smasher the size of the solar system to hit those energies.
Of course, brand spanking new physics could alter the "roadmap", but since the Standard Model does predict *just about* everything we have seen in experiments, then it means our physics is still incomplete, but has become accurate enough that we can predict what would happen down to the place we'd need the hundred million TeV to see anything new or to answer the specific items that the Standard Model does leave open.
When does a "security company" not understand that you don't run a webserver as root? Just about every distro's webserver package will make a webserver run as a non-root user by default. These guys not only overlooked the fact that their webserver was running as root, they probably rolled their own web server install to begin with to even make that possible.
As someone else pointed out, they must have used lawyers to protect their data, because they clearly didn't employ any system administrators.
It is mostly a problem if the person doesn't know about this password hack happening. At least some of the people who signed up for that site probably don't understand the full threat and aren't following tech news.
It's also a problem if there are accounts that this user has forgotten they had, but which use the same password.
You probably shouldn't get modded down. Some of my fine CS and engineering compatriots have attended schools founded by Robber Barons and financiers of another age. Bill Gates isn't even the worst of that set, although perhaps the richest.
Bill Gates may have been an unscrupulous businessman who is even now, somehow doing wrong while at the same time, donating to charity, but I wouldn't argue with taking his money if it got the job done.
I agree that you don't need a computer to learn English lit. I had some access to computers in my school, but mostly everything was books and paper. They did make me type all my papers after a certain point, though, so typing papers is a far-from-new phenomenon.
However, computers are becoming so pervasive for everything these days that I think relying on only a "computer class" to integrate the practical use of computers just isn't going to cut it if these students want to deal with the realities of life in the 21st Century in the US. Everything is going online and eventually everyone will need to use a computer for something. This is a different world than I grew up in, and as I look at my parents, struggling through using computers, the last thing I want to do is manufacture more people who are less proficient with them in the name of good old book learning.
Textbooks are extremely expensive as well, and while they may be readable for a long time, they certainly can become obsolete and completely lack interactivity. I think schools should be able to provide enough computers for the use of their students. I know that certain teachers sometimes turn these computers into playthings, and for that, I think we need someone to take a good look at where and when computers are appropriate. But make no mistake, they are quite simply the replacement for libraries and typewriters, being more functional and much more convenient than either. .Librarians themselves are not outdated, but card catalogs and the Dewey Decimal system alone just aren't cutting it any more.
If anything, I'd turn the library into rows of desks with computers on them and have librarians spend their time finding online resources to curate and add to an "online school library" which can be research source with better provenance than the general Internet. I love books, and they have their own virtues, but they also have serious limitations. They certainly should remain in some form, and an English class is probably the best place for them to remain permanently, but textbooks in general just have portability to speak for them, and today, not even that now that lightweight tablets and laptops are out there. My full-on laptop today weighs as much as just one textbook (of many) that I used to lug around and can contain by itself, copies of every textbook I have ever used, with a lot of spare room. And that's ignoring the internet.
The real problem with the Internet is that it can be difficult to use it as a trustworthy reference resource, but that can be overcome by developing a standard set of resources online.
I don't want to over-do my enthusiasm for computers in school. Time and time again, they get used as toys by teachers who don't know how to use them, and enthusiasts who become teachers and end up teaching more about computers than the subject at hand. However, they do represent progress in how information can be shared, produced and distributed and cannot be ignored in any school that is trying to do more than simply impart basic literacy and McDonald's worker skills.
There may be a line for computers in the library. Not to mention that you could open more WiFi areas in school where more computers allows more access for more people at once.
But, aside from areas like school, you have a point. Internet access would be necessary, and while there are programs and clever ways of obtaining said access, that access cannot be assumed.
Of course, back when I was young, you needed to go to libraries to do your papers because the Internet was a big research project, so it may not be too much to ask for the kids to go to the library to do their work. Not as convenient as going home, but perhaps less distraction. I know I always did good work in the library when I could make myself go there. Obviously, competition for school computers would be a problem, and this is where this project might come in handy.
The teacher would just have to not be a jerk about making the project parameters be set up in such a way that having to use a library or other communal space for Internet access be a huge disadvantage.
We can already make industrial quantities of wine and other beverages, and yet there are still people who will pay a stupid amount of money for wines and spirits that have been "aged" in a certain way or combined with exotic ingredients like "glacier water from the Himalayas".
So, it is easy to see how farmers could stay in business with actual cows, albeit not in direct competition with industrial farms because industrial farming will be dead and replaced by industrial vat protein production.
The traditional farmers just play up "better flavor", the hint of elitism, and of course, the idea that somehow doing it the non-vat way is more "friendly" to the environment, "organic", and "green". It will be an interesting and probably sad day for me when a real filet goes from $40 in a restaurant to $200, but that's probably how farmers will remain in business.
Many dog personality traits are certainly the products of their environment. You might be able to replicate those experiences in a general sense to get more or less the same effect, but that would require years of training. And the dog would likely not have any of the less desirable, but individual traits that made him or her unique. In some cases the dog would be "better", but that might well generate a "Stepford dog".
In any event, considering all the work that goes into generating a personality, why bother? The worst thing I could imagine would be cloning some dogs while there are perfectly good rescue dogs waiting for adoption. Or just get some new puppies. Make some new friends.
Losing a pet permanently is a teaching experience in life that shows you how to move on and deal with death. Unless you really were somehow saving the original Rover from death via brain download or something, I don't think a cloned pet is a good idea.
Look up the case and see if you are a member of the Class. Actually, you will probably be contacted if you are a member of the Class and given the option to accept the settlement and extinguish your right to sue yourself, or you can refuse the settlement and keep your right to sue independently. So make sure Intel knows where to find you.
If it is as much as $6k, I'd join the class unless you have the savings to hire a high powered legal team. The Intel corporate lawyers will own you otherwise.
Just get them to employ fair employment practices and no one has to get hurt here.
When tank battalions start rolling, *everyone* gets fucked. Let's not call for that. Thanks.