You die and get frozen. A death certificate is issued. The life insurance policy pays out and the money is stashed. Many years later a frozen body is revived and (somehow) goes to the bank[1] to claim the money.
The cashier says "certainly sir, I just need you to provide some identification." And that's where it all falls apart. How does a person (who's officially dead) prove that they're not dead. Especially when all their money is being held by the bank who won't release it until the proof come s through. Even worse: where do you sleep that night, and thereafter until a court order comes through some days, weeks or months later? I doubt your credit cards would work, so you're destitute and would probably even have to walk from the popsicle farm to the bank.
[1] presuming the bank hasn't gone bust, changed it's name, relocated to an address you're not familiar with or simply become "virtual" with no high-street presence at all.
Oh crap, you're doomed. With this new patent you'll be happily driving along when all of a sudden your car stops, the seatbelt tensions around your neck and the iPod starts to say: "Now, just honk your horn twice and I'll order you a brand new Mac - you wouldn't want to annoy me, would you" (as the seatbelt gets ominously tighter).
Really, there are many more and often better alternatives to pretty much everything that Apple sells. I can see no reason why I would feel the need to be abused by stuff I've paid for and have it tell me what to do.
The article paints a negative picture, when in fact the opposite is true: testing works! When we test stuff we find the bugs, fix them and re-test. After a few iterations the tests are passed. What's wrong with that? As someone who's done a *lot* of testing in the past it sounds to me like the process works.
If the testing process didn't find any problems and passed a product on the firsat attempt, I'd be more suspicious of the tests than of the product - not that I'd buy the product, either.
If a bestseller shifts (say) 1 million copies then the set-up costs are pennies per copy. However if a textbook - even a good one, only sells 50,000 copies then the set-up costs can be $20+++ per copy. Add on to that having to distribute books in ones and twos soon adds up. $100 a shot doesn't sound too bad and if the text is a classic (as opposed to being written by a friend of the lecturer) then you can easily pick up used copies.
Using the resume alone in filtering people is sleazy
Hardly - that's exactly what it's for, to decide which applicants go on to the next (and more time consuming) stage of personal selection.. If someone can't be bothered to represent themselves clearly and professionally when it's so obviously in their own best interests, what hope is there that they will have the maturity to act professionally and demonstrate ability once they have the job?
So far as giving them tests go, isn't that what tertiary education is about - why waste time duplicating that effort in a less effective way. It's not as if your single test is going to be a better indicator of their abilities than 3 or 4 years of full-time education.
When you get dozens of applications for a single position there's got to be some pre-interview filtering - otherwise people would waste all their time (no matter which side of the desk you sit on) interviewing. After you've discarded the poorly spelt and punctuated offerings and before throwing the pile into the air[1] you might as well try one more layer of objective selection. What could be better than preferring people who've got more education?
[1] once observed: the best way to select a candidate is to throw all the CVs (american: resumes) into the air. The one(s) that stick to the ceiling get hired. After all we want "lucky" people working here.
Just like the "bomber gap" and the "missile gap" which were either paranoia-driven nonsense or a simple (but effective) way to get finding for weapons that no-one needed, or used.
Maybe the best way america could defend itself from the threat of baddies with computers would be to cut themselves off from the rest of the world.
The implementation we used (SWURCC, England. 1978 - ?) had a "cookie monster" program. Briefly, this was a process that wandered randomly around the logged in users, occasionally taking control of their VDU and sending the message "I wanna cookie" It would only give you your screen back once the user typed "cookie". Swearing at it got you disconnected.
I have a feeling that this "feature" got removed very soon after it snarfed the Computer Unit Director's screen.
Such as street access. Is there more than one way in, if the access road was closed off (police incident, subsidence, civil unrest - depending where it's sited), what would happen. Could staff get to work, or leave for home?
Ease of recruiting / retaining sufficiently qualified staff in the locale, or persuading your to commute or relocate
Is the on-site restaurant / canteen or local eateries likely to give everyone food poisoning (this could be a single point of failure)
Local crime rate - number of times the facility has been broken in to - even the amount of graffiti on the walls could be a negative indicator
Fair point, so basically the choice comes down to possibly being blown up by the rocket, or fried by the laser. Luckily the third option (i.e. none of the above) is the default.
skinny women are less fit hosts for a fetus than heavier women
Maybe they've got cause and effect the wrong way round. Maybe after the first baby, the women in this study put on weight. Women who didn't have children didn't gain weight so skewed the samples and results?
Framingham is not America and America is not the world. While this report might hold true for a statistically insignificant group in one country, it tells us nothing about human evolution over the whole planet.
The traits described probably have more to do with proximity to the local McDonalds, than anythiing about "survival of the fa^Hittest"
It is a bad thing - an extremely bad thing. There are processes for removing councilors who are doing a bad job, acting illegally or who lose the trust of the people who voted for them. Just like it's bad to have national newspapers that sway elections when the owner decides he/she "likes" one party over another.
When this item hit the TV news (some days ago) the overwhelming view from the resigning councilors was not that they had any skeletons in their cupboards, or had been corrupt or done anything wrong - simply that they didn't feel the need to give up their time, only to be criticised by some guy, so they quit.
If this guy wants to change the local council he should stand for election himself - not snipe at the volunteer members from the safety of an internet site. However, he's still only entitled to one seat on the council, not to force the removal or resignation of many. The anti-democratic part of this is the blogger NOT using the due process to change the council members.
And what prevented those councillors from telling their side of the story?.
Probably the fact that they're not intersted in blogging or using the internet. That doesn't make them web-illiterate, just as not having in interest in racing cars means you're a bad driver: just that they have neither the eloquence, nor ability, time or maybe even the low standards needed to engage in a war of words with someone who obviously has his own personal issues with these guys.
After all, they're only volunteers, standing for a town council, why should that require blogging or P.R. skills?
One person's actions manages to unseat several elected officials
If we believe all the media hype - that this guy's blog did actually have any bearing on the resignations of these people, then it's a bad day for democracy. They had been elected in a legal way, by winning the most votes from the people in their wards. Then one person, decides he doesn't like them and starts a personal assault on them: collectively and individually. Now, it could well be said that these unpaid officials shouldn't have put themselves in the public eye if they aren't prepared to take some heat - but they're really just volunteers (and a lot of them aren't exactly in the prime of life). As a consequence of this continual sniping, they decide they've had enough and quit. So much for giving the electors representation, so much for reflecting the wishes of the people. One person's ability to publicise his personal and (I am told) unfounded views about their personal lives and business interests reduces the democratic process to a farce.
If he objects so much, why didn't he stand for election himself?
If a newspaper owner holds a certain view, then that's the line the editorial tone will take. It's a long standing conclusion with "independent" publications and will only transfer into government subsidised publications. If you want state-subsidised newspapers, then expect them to carry stories that show their paymasters in a beneficial light.
I have one set up too. With no disk (CF card on a CF-IDE adapter) it's as slow as a dog for loading programs, but only uses 13Watts. Plus it's completely silent. So long as you have enough RAM to keep all your apps resident, their response times won't be too bad. Plus writes to cache help speed things up - so long as your electricity supply is reliable.
Not great for surfing, or HD video but a home server is generally just passing data around and leaves the compute intensive stuff to the users' PCs.
Viruses, worms etc. aren't really the users' problem - unless you can categorically point the finger at an individual and get them fired (as an example, pour les autres). Why should they care if THE COMPANY computers crash, or slow down or give them reasons why they can't do their job?
So why should they go to the inconvenience of not clicking on links that they want to, or not visiting any website that takes their fancy? By appealing to their "professionalism" or "humanity" or "team spirit" you're probably on a loser. While these might get them gee-d up for a short time, you can bet that unless there's some personal pain involved in doing it, they'll be back to their old habits in a few weeks time.
Once you can put security in terms a normal user will understand: i.e. If you click on a bad website, these bad things will happen TO YOU, they'll pay attention. Until then you haven't got a chance.
For shareware, having the ability to give a package a test run is an absolute necessity. Most shareware that I've tried is complete rubbish, not worth the disk space it takes, nor the amount of my time needed to install (and clean up after) it. Let alone the frequently downright greedy fees the owner wants for it.
Since shareware is hardly ever documented to any useful degree, it's impossible to tell from the short, and often out of date paragraph of description whether it will, in fact do what it purports to. Nor does it tell whether it will run on my particular O/S, version or if it will screw up any of the other software I am using, or if it has any pre-requisites that the authors have forgotten to mention.. Even worse is the frequent lack of bug lists, workarounds instructions, help/howto files or any or any of the other basic documents that a worthwhile package has.
For these reasons, the only viable way to discover for yourself if a piece of shareware is worth buying is to try it out. Sadly most fail dismally.
On Amazon's websites: War and Peace, same edition, UK and US prices. Penguin Classics (paperback) in the US this is sold for $10.88 with free delivery. In the UK the price is £7.12 with free delivery. Using an exchange rate of $1.60 to the £, the prices are certainly not 40% different.
I'd expect the chinese internet censorship would severely limit the ability of "citizens" to gain access to restricted foreign web resources. At least those citizens who did not have special privileges, such as living in places like Hong Kong where the restrictions are less. Plus, the chinese authoritites monitor all their citizens' web usage, so a bit of freelance spying would be easily detectable (and would obviate the need to report finding to the government: they'd already know what a person had found, from monitoring that person's usage)
In fact hacking through a foreign governments secret, but badly secured websites could severely damage a citizen's health (fatally!) if it caused that website to improve it's security - thereby making it harder for the real spies to gain access.
I'm sure every country is spying on every other one - including so-called "allies". All this tells us is there's one single case study where someone's internet security wasn't up to scratch.
Slashdot Mirror
The cashier says "certainly sir, I just need you to provide some identification." And that's where it all falls apart. How does a person (who's officially dead) prove that they're not dead. Especially when all their money is being held by the bank who won't release it until the proof come s through. Even worse: where do you sleep that night, and thereafter until a court order comes through some days, weeks or months later? I doubt your credit cards would work, so you're destitute and would probably even have to walk from the popsicle farm to the bank.
[1] presuming the bank hasn't gone bust, changed it's name, relocated to an address you're not familiar with or simply become "virtual" with no high-street presence at all.
It has iPod connectivity
Oh crap, you're doomed. With this new patent you'll be happily driving along when all of a sudden your car stops, the seatbelt tensions around your neck and the iPod starts to say: "Now, just honk your horn twice and I'll order you a brand new Mac - you wouldn't want to annoy me, would you" (as the seatbelt gets ominously tighter).
Really, there are many more and often better alternatives to pretty much everything that Apple sells. I can see no reason why I would feel the need to be abused by stuff I've paid for and have it tell me what to do.
If the testing process didn't find any problems and passed a product on the firsat attempt, I'd be more suspicious of the tests than of the product - not that I'd buy the product, either.
If a bestseller shifts (say) 1 million copies then the set-up costs are pennies per copy. However if a textbook - even a good one, only sells 50,000 copies then the set-up costs can be $20+++ per copy. Add on to that having to distribute books in ones and twos soon adds up. $100 a shot doesn't sound too bad and if the text is a classic (as opposed to being written by a friend of the lecturer) then you can easily pick up used copies.
Using the resume alone in filtering people is sleazy
Hardly - that's exactly what it's for, to decide which applicants go on to the next (and more time consuming) stage of personal selection.. If someone can't be bothered to represent themselves clearly and professionally when it's so obviously in their own best interests, what hope is there that they will have the maturity to act professionally and demonstrate ability once they have the job?
So far as giving them tests go, isn't that what tertiary education is about - why waste time duplicating that effort in a less effective way. It's not as if your single test is going to be a better indicator of their abilities than 3 or 4 years of full-time education.
[1] once observed: the best way to select a candidate is to throw all the CVs (american: resumes) into the air. The one(s) that stick to the ceiling get hired. After all we want "lucky" people working here.
Just like the "bomber gap" and the "missile gap" which were either paranoia-driven nonsense or a simple (but effective) way to get finding for weapons that no-one needed, or used.
Maybe the best way america could defend itself from the threat of baddies with computers would be to cut themselves off from the rest of the world.
I have a feeling that this "feature" got removed very soon after it snarfed the Computer Unit Director's screen.
Such as street access. Is there more than one way in, if the access road was closed off (police incident, subsidence, civil unrest - depending where it's sited), what would happen. Could staff get to work, or leave for home?
Ease of recruiting / retaining sufficiently qualified staff in the locale, or persuading your to commute or relocate
Is the on-site restaurant / canteen or local eateries likely to give everyone food poisoning (this could be a single point of failure)
Local crime rate - number of times the facility has been broken in to - even the amount of graffiti on the walls could be a negative indicator
You'll also get the whole set of seats to yourself.
Fair point, so basically the choice comes down to possibly being blown up by the rocket, or fried by the laser. Luckily the third option (i.e. none of the above) is the default.
Personally I'd be very wary of traveling in what's basically a lift (american: elevator) with a honkin' great laser firing at the capsule.
skinny women are less fit hosts for a fetus than heavier women
Maybe they've got cause and effect the wrong way round. Maybe after the first baby, the women in this study put on weight. Women who didn't have children didn't gain weight so skewed the samples and results?
The traits described probably have more to do with proximity to the local McDonalds, than anythiing about "survival of the fa^Hittest"
When this item hit the TV news (some days ago) the overwhelming view from the resigning councilors was not that they had any skeletons in their cupboards, or had been corrupt or done anything wrong - simply that they didn't feel the need to give up their time, only to be criticised by some guy, so they quit.
If this guy wants to change the local council he should stand for election himself - not snipe at the volunteer members from the safety of an internet site. However, he's still only entitled to one seat on the council, not to force the removal or resignation of many. The anti-democratic part of this is the blogger NOT using the due process to change the council members.
And what prevented those councillors from telling their side of the story?.
Probably the fact that they're not intersted in blogging or using the internet. That doesn't make them web-illiterate, just as not having in interest in racing cars means you're a bad driver: just that they have neither the eloquence, nor ability, time or maybe even the low standards needed to engage in a war of words with someone who obviously has his own personal issues with these guys.
After all, they're only volunteers, standing for a town council, why should that require blogging or P.R. skills?
If we believe all the media hype - that this guy's blog did actually have any bearing on the resignations of these people, then it's a bad day for democracy. They had been elected in a legal way, by winning the most votes from the people in their wards. Then one person, decides he doesn't like them and starts a personal assault on them: collectively and individually. Now, it could well be said that these unpaid officials shouldn't have put themselves in the public eye if they aren't prepared to take some heat - but they're really just volunteers (and a lot of them aren't exactly in the prime of life). As a consequence of this continual sniping, they decide they've had enough and quit. So much for giving the electors representation, so much for reflecting the wishes of the people. One person's ability to publicise his personal and (I am told) unfounded views about their personal lives and business interests reduces the democratic process to a farce.
If he objects so much, why didn't he stand for election himself?
If a newspaper owner holds a certain view, then that's the line the editorial tone will take. It's a long standing conclusion with "independent" publications and will only transfer into government subsidised publications. If you want state-subsidised newspapers, then expect them to carry stories that show their paymasters in a beneficial light.
God help you when elections come around.
Not great for surfing, or HD video but a home server is generally just passing data around and leaves the compute intensive stuff to the users' PCs.
So why should they go to the inconvenience of not clicking on links that they want to, or not visiting any website that takes their fancy? By appealing to their "professionalism" or "humanity" or "team spirit" you're probably on a loser. While these might get them gee-d up for a short time, you can bet that unless there's some personal pain involved in doing it, they'll be back to their old habits in a few weeks time.
Once you can put security in terms a normal user will understand: i.e. If you click on a bad website, these bad things will happen TO YOU, they'll pay attention. Until then you haven't got a chance.
Since shareware is hardly ever documented to any useful degree, it's impossible to tell from the short, and often out of date paragraph of description whether it will, in fact do what it purports to. Nor does it tell whether it will run on my particular O/S, version or if it will screw up any of the other software I am using, or if it has any pre-requisites that the authors have forgotten to mention.. Even worse is the frequent lack of bug lists, workarounds instructions, help/howto files or any or any of the other basic documents that a worthwhile package has.
For these reasons, the only viable way to discover for yourself if a piece of shareware is worth buying is to try it out. Sadly most fail dismally.
So why do I get the feeling I am being lied to?
In fact hacking through a foreign governments secret, but badly secured websites could severely damage a citizen's health (fatally!) if it caused that website to improve it's security - thereby making it harder for the real spies to gain access.
I'm sure every country is spying on every other one - including so-called "allies". All this tells us is there's one single case study where someone's internet security wasn't up to scratch.