I hadn't even considered that issue. My problem with it is reliability, replacement cost, and glare issues from driving in daylight. My backup camera is great, except I can't see it when my car is pointed north in the morning and the sun shines onto the screen through the sunroof.
If it breaks, well a mirror face is a $30 replacement, installed.
The upside, on the other hand, is at night when people's headlghts are blinding, they would only ever be as bright as the LCD can get, and not shining a beam into my eyes. Worst case, is the rear view is unusable.... worst case with mirrors is quite an annoyance.
> To be honest, if I were a fraudster, the very last place I'd start is a business that is likely to go > bankrupt even if it trades honestly
But that would assume the fraudster understands these particular dynamics and/or agrees it is likely to go bankrupt even if trading honestly. Frankly, I am not sure I agree with that assessment. Had they operated properly and not fucked up so royally (assuming it wasn't intentional) I don't see why they were likely to go bankrupt.
It is also entirely possible they didn't even consider stealing until they realized how they could do it.
Seriously, lots of criminals do things that you can point to and say are pretty stupid moves for a person in their position. Crime is seldom the result of a careful weighing of potential failure modes and consequences.
Not to mention, an "inside job" could have been the setup. If I was going to do something like this, I would certainly want to be an ex-employee before the shit hit the fan.
You are assuming that an inside job necessarily implicates the owner directly, and not some other technical employee, who may have even signed on to the company with the intention to rob them blind.
I do agree that it sounds like an inside job, however it looks like an inside job by someone smart enough to be sneaky about it; not someone just reaching into the cookie jar.
Then again, it could be a little of collumn A, a little of Collumn B, maybe the attack stole some, and someone else saw that and took the rest figuring that the original theft was a good cover and that whoever took a few was going to be a good patsy that the square community wouldn't care about. (well aren't they?)
Lots of possibilities, but I wouldn't assume the guy at the top was necessarily in on it. Now if they suddenly find all the missing coins but somewhere around the number claimed in this article, that would be very suspicous indeed.
You may be right, I missed the "through or by" so perhaps. Given the intent, it still seems odd. So only dismissal or its threat matters? I have trouble believing I could say, offer a pay raise to people who volunteer for the Democrats only, or not consider someone for a promotion because they were a Republican?
Its possible there is more than this single statute in play, but it does seem rather watered down and useless if its interpreted as threats of loss of employment are the only thing barred.
Then again, last I heard, its still legal to be fired for reasons like being gay in many states, which doesn't change anything about this except that...I suppose it shouldn't be surprising if protections are weak or non-existent.
> but there's no reason they couldn't have put him in a role where he didn't lead Mozilla.
That is not how I read the quoted statute:
'No employer shall coerce or influence or attempt to coerce or influence his employees through or by means of threat of discharge or loss of employment to adopt or follow or refrain from adopting or following any particular course or line of political action or political activity.'
Notice "Shall not coerce or influence" not simply "by means of threat of discharge" but "....or by...."
So in fact, it would seem to me ANY attempt to influence, by ANY means, including removal from leadership to another rule.... would STILL violate the statute, and really well it should. While I am quite sympathetic to to vitrol on this, and I don't have much respect for the side he supported.... the fact remains he has every right to engage in the political process in any legal manner he chooses without interference of any kind from his employer.
Gay people deserve every right anyone else has, including equal protection (which is really what this is about)....and so do bigots.
Sure, you thought they had precious little to do when they started calling kids running DDOS scripts criminals. You knew it was bad the second and third times they created their own terrorist and handed him weapons from their own stockpile to arrest him with....
Now.... they are releasing politically motivated propaganda. Moving on up.
No, they should keep newbs out of it by writing it in something only real programers understand....raw unadorned machine code, by using a hex editor on the raw disk partition.
What I don't get is why. I mean, we are talking about a job? This is Mozilla right? They make a web browser? As much as I disagree with him on gay marriage (hell, the last wedding I went to had two grooms) I really don't think making a political contribution should cost a person a job.
I mean, I could understand if he actually was a politician, yes, they should be fired for their political statements and beliefs, but, wtf does it have to do with producing a browser? If it was about some policy he was pushing for at the company that is one thing but.... for a campaign donation, to a cause that lost and is over with?
I mean, he didn't come out and say he was going to make the company ignore the law and refuse to acknowledge same sex spouses of their employees? Did I miss that? because, this seems to me like being sore winners.
That sounds right to me. If you are inside a simulation then the simulation is all the reality you have access to. If the universe around you that you have the direct ability to interact with isn't reality, then what is?
In our world, 2 body gravitational physics is a simplicifaction that sometimes helps, sometimes doesn't. If my Kerbals become self-aware, that is no simulation to them, that really is how physics works.
We can make low energy transfers to the moon by taking advantage of the dynamics multiple simultaneous pulls; because 2 body gravity is only a simiplification for us.... they will never get to the Mun that way....it just doesn't happen. No matter what experiment they do, they will never find evidence of multiple body gravitation.
I think you have it backwards and a bad example. They are looking for a predicted result and not seeing it; this strikes me at an attempt at asking if the prediction itself could be wrong.
When it comes to a quantum superposition of states, you need look no further than papers on the Bell Inequality to see a well defined situation with well defined predicted outcomes. Thouse outcomes clearly come down on the side of the predicted superpositions.
Then look at the cat problem. What does it even mean for the entire cat to be in a superposition of living and dead? Is it really a prediction of the wave equation or is it ignoring the realities of underlying complexity, the same complexity that makes the wave equation impossible to calculate.
Without being able to say with certainty what the prediciton is, do you actually even have a hypothesis?
I remember one of the smart but more humanities oriented friends of mine tried to engage the AP Physics teacher in a debate about whether the world really exists or could be a simulation/fantasy/etc. At the first posing of the question, the teacher immediately turned and flung himself bodily against the wall and exclaimed that it seemed pretty real to him.
I think there is an insight there that is lost often. If the world is a simulation, then how would we ever know as we have nothing to compare it to? Sure we can suspect, we can show that some quirks of quantities in this universe can be explained by the universe being a simulation of some sort..... but, those quircks would always be the only reference we have to compare against.
> I don't think they are saying that the universe itself can't "run" the "computations", but > that part is not clear.
I thought they were clear when they said "He says there is an implicit assumption when physicists say that SchrÃdingerâ(TM)s equation can describe macroscopic systems. This assumption is that the equations can be solved in a reasonable amount of time to produce an answer."
So, if you can't solve the equation for an answer, you can't make a prediction. Take the system of the cat in the box, it is commonly said that the cat should be in a superposition of states but... that isn't based on someone solving the wave function....that is a guess based on understanding the general form of the wave function. Nobody can actually solve the wave function for a real system to the point that it completely represents an entire cat in a superposition.
Since they can't do that, the prediction that the cat should be in a superposition is not a valid hypothesis; it is more like a guess at what the testable result would be if you could compute it.
Not so sure about that. The very fact that this is news tells me:
1. It doesn't happen too often. There have been a handful of these... over the course of a few years. If it was happening every day, we wouldn't see stories about Linus chewing out some dev, nobody would bother posting stories like this every week or even month for long.
2. Since these stories have occasionally cropped up, I can't think of a single serious kernel story I have seen of any kind. SO the kernel must be in pretty good, stable shape if this is all there is to report.
Not only that but, its not like they add realistic sounds anyway. If you have an exterior shot of a car driving quickly down a road lines with trees, why is the dubbed in "engine sound" more natural there? It isn't what you would hear with the car driving by, it isn't what you would hear if you were magically floating in the air following the car like the camera is.... where is the wind noise? The bumps in the road? Wheels going over sticks? Leaves russling in the wind? Wind noise at the speeds in many of those shots should be loud enough to cause hearing damage over time....nobody faults them for not including that.
while that does make some sense.... I posted that before my drive in, and so I was thinking on my drive, and there is one definite way in which these systems are not superior to mirrors: Glare.
When sunlight shines on my mirror at the angles it does, it does not interfere with the reflection in the mirror. LCD screens shine light through the screen, rather than using a reflective surface.
I can't barely make out the image on my backup camera when the sun shines through the window onto the screen.
The only comparable issue with mirrors is at night with headlights, when lcd screens would really um.... shine.
Yes but you can see more out of a mirror by just moving your head slightly, no need to reposition the camera for small adjustments, which can be significant at working distances.
> You'll most likely get multiple cameras, stitched views, and more coverage,
Maybe eventually. I would still like to keep my mirror in addition.
> I'd be happy just to get a good rearview camera on my motorbike. All I get to see in the mirrors are my elbows...
I had that problem too. It is actually a common problem, and good reason to check out the wide world of aftermarket accessories. Like... mirror risers or extenders. Swapping them out takes all of about a minute.
Except they already have the money. The real truth is likely that you are half right. However, they will not be "tackled". No, they will take their money, and existing expertise, and become the next version Kennedy and Rockefeller families.
40 years down the line, Mexico will be electing their children to office.
I have made the open offer before that anyone who thinks waterboarding isn't torture is welcome to explain to me why that is, as long as they can do it while being waterboarded until I am satisfied with what they are saying is the truth.
If you think that is easy and cheap....I have this bridge in NYC for sale, and man is it a steal!
You seriously think someone putting up those posters wont be found hanging from a brige with posters nailed to his corpse? These Cartels are not street gangs like we have street gangs now. They are better armed, better funded, and in some cases....are the police.
Shit the Zetas, ever heard of them? They were started by police.
There is no easy way out now that these monsters have been created. Created by naieve people seeking simple solutions. People who thought they could enforce away drug problems.... they failed to change addiction rates (their basic goal) and instead, created violent street gangs...here and around the world.
Now this is the result. The same result as alcohol prohibition gave us, except amplified because instead of a short 15 or so years, its been going on for generations now.
Frankly, every single one of those drug warriers who created this situation deserve to be strung up from their necks in appreciation for the mess they made while trying and failing to control people's desires.
> OKCupid is briefly bringing it to the attention of Firefox users and then allowing them to continue > using the site unimpeded. As 'retaliation' goes that is pretty damn mild.
Agreed. I almost went off on a rant about this last night when I noticed that they allow anyone to click right through and use the site anyway. They are using their position as a bully pulpit, big deal. Its not like anyone is even prevented from doing anything.
> I am also getting rather tired of this 'making people afraid to voice their viewpoints' meme. The > anti-gay movement is not even remotely afraid to voice their views, they are in a very strong position.
Actually I think you will find this is far less true than it used to be. Tolerance for the anti-gay crowd in general seems to be waning. In fact, so far, it seems every company that announces a gay-friendly policy or stance gets huge support.
I think the reality is, their position was never all that strong and was mostly perpetuated by the combination of a small number of vocal people who cared, and a large number of people who really didn't care that much and went along....mostly because they never had reason to think much about it.
Even as a teenager before I knew that I knew any gay people, even then I noticed that whenever it came up, it was always the same people, and they gave the impression of true physical revulsion at the very idea of gay sex.... a revulsion that I never experienced, even not being gay myself....not only that but that... other people...the ones nodding and going along with the haters... they didn't exhibit the same reactions either!
Overall, I think more people expressed anti-gay ideas out of fear of being branded gay by buliies or out of not wanting to make waves, than actually hated gay people.
Ahhh but it isn't just "labs will release viruses" but that labs particularly worried about really nasty viruses, will create them in order to study the possibility, leading to the very outbreaks they were created to study in hopes of avoiding.
Its not just labs working on viruses, but people being so worried about labs creating plagues that they create labs that create plagues as a result.
Slashdot Mirror
I hadn't even considered that issue. My problem with it is reliability, replacement cost, and glare issues from driving in daylight. My backup camera is great, except I can't see it when my car is pointed north in the morning and the sun shines onto the screen through the sunroof.
If it breaks, well a mirror face is a $30 replacement, installed.
The upside, on the other hand, is at night when people's headlghts are blinding, they would only ever be as bright as the LCD can get, and not shining a beam into my eyes. Worst case, is the rear view is unusable.... worst case with mirrors is quite an annoyance.
> To be honest, if I were a fraudster, the very last place I'd start is a business that is likely to go
> bankrupt even if it trades honestly
But that would assume the fraudster understands these particular dynamics and/or agrees it is likely to go bankrupt even if trading honestly. Frankly, I am not sure I agree with that assessment. Had they operated properly and not fucked up so royally (assuming it wasn't intentional) I don't see why they were likely to go bankrupt.
It is also entirely possible they didn't even consider stealing until they realized how they could do it.
Seriously, lots of criminals do things that you can point to and say are pretty stupid moves for a person in their position. Crime is seldom the result of a careful weighing of potential failure modes and consequences.
Not to mention, an "inside job" could have been the setup. If I was going to do something like this, I would certainly want to be an ex-employee before the shit hit the fan.
You are assuming that an inside job necessarily implicates the owner directly, and not some other technical employee, who may have even signed on to the company with the intention to rob them blind.
I do agree that it sounds like an inside job, however it looks like an inside job by someone smart enough to be sneaky about it; not someone just reaching into the cookie jar.
Then again, it could be a little of collumn A, a little of Collumn B, maybe the attack stole some, and someone else saw that and took the rest figuring that the original theft was a good cover and that whoever took a few was going to be a good patsy that the square community wouldn't care about. (well aren't they?)
Lots of possibilities, but I wouldn't assume the guy at the top was necessarily in on it. Now if they suddenly find all the missing coins but somewhere around the number claimed in this article, that would be very suspicous indeed.
You may be right, I missed the "through or by" so perhaps. Given the intent, it still seems odd. So only dismissal or its threat matters? I have trouble believing I could say, offer a pay raise to people who volunteer for the Democrats only, or not consider someone for a promotion because they were a Republican?
Its possible there is more than this single statute in play, but it does seem rather watered down and useless if its interpreted as threats of loss of employment are the only thing barred.
Then again, last I heard, its still legal to be fired for reasons like being gay in many states, which doesn't change anything about this except that...I suppose it shouldn't be surprising if protections are weak or non-existent.
> Now if it continues to happen over a larger area, for some time, then it will become a trend.
Yes but then it will be a normal occurrence and thus not news.
> or from his underlings (who have no authority to dismiss the CEO) then they don't really
> mean anything
Really because if the pressure came from other employees, and the board didn't do anything about it, wouldn't that be a hostile work environment?
> but there's no reason they couldn't have put him in a role where he didn't lead Mozilla.
That is not how I read the quoted statute:
Notice "Shall not coerce or influence" not simply "by means of threat of discharge" but "....or by...."
So in fact, it would seem to me ANY attempt to influence, by ANY means, including removal from leadership to another rule.... would STILL violate the statute, and really well it should. While I am quite sympathetic to to vitrol on this, and I don't have much respect for the side he supported.... the fact remains he has every right to engage in the political process in any legal manner he chooses without interference of any kind from his employer.
Gay people deserve every right anyone else has, including equal protection (which is really what this is about)....and so do bigots.
They did it!
Sure, you thought they had precious little to do when they started calling kids running DDOS scripts criminals. You knew it was bad the second and third times they created their own terrorist and handed him weapons from their own stockpile to arrest him with....
Now.... they are releasing politically motivated propaganda. Moving on up.
No, they should keep newbs out of it by writing it in something only real programers understand....raw unadorned machine code, by using a hex editor on the raw disk partition.
No; GP was right, should have looked it up:
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
What I don't get is why. I mean, we are talking about a job? This is Mozilla right? They make a web browser? As much as I disagree with him on gay marriage (hell, the last wedding I went to had two grooms) I really don't think making a political contribution should cost a person a job.
I mean, I could understand if he actually was a politician, yes, they should be fired for their political statements and beliefs, but, wtf does it have to do with producing a browser? If it was about some policy he was pushing for at the company that is one thing but.... for a campaign donation, to a cause that lost and is over with?
I mean, he didn't come out and say he was going to make the company ignore the law and refuse to acknowledge same sex spouses of their employees? Did I miss that? because, this seems to me like being sore winners.
That sounds right to me. If you are inside a simulation then the simulation is all the reality you have access to. If the universe around you that you have the direct ability to interact with isn't reality, then what is?
In our world, 2 body gravitational physics is a simplicifaction that sometimes helps, sometimes doesn't. If my Kerbals become self-aware, that is no simulation to them, that really is how physics works.
We can make low energy transfers to the moon by taking advantage of the dynamics multiple simultaneous pulls; because 2 body gravity is only a simiplification for us.... they will never get to the Mun that way....it just doesn't happen. No matter what experiment they do, they will never find evidence of multiple body gravitation.
I wonder how many universes end when their inhabitants cause a fault in the code and their designer fails his simulation class.
I think you have it backwards and a bad example. They are looking for a predicted result and not seeing it; this strikes me at an attempt at asking if the prediction itself could be wrong.
When it comes to a quantum superposition of states, you need look no further than papers on the Bell Inequality to see a well defined situation with well defined predicted outcomes. Thouse outcomes clearly come down on the side of the predicted superpositions.
Then look at the cat problem. What does it even mean for the entire cat to be in a superposition of living and dead? Is it really a prediction of the wave equation or is it ignoring the realities of underlying complexity, the same complexity that makes the wave equation impossible to calculate.
Without being able to say with certainty what the prediciton is, do you actually even have a hypothesis?
I remember one of the smart but more humanities oriented friends of mine tried to engage the AP Physics teacher in a debate about whether the world really exists or could be a simulation/fantasy/etc. At the first posing of the question, the teacher immediately turned and flung himself bodily against the wall and exclaimed that it seemed pretty real to him.
I think there is an insight there that is lost often. If the world is a simulation, then how would we ever know as we have nothing to compare it to? Sure we can suspect, we can show that some quirks of quantities in this universe can be explained by the universe being a simulation of some sort..... but, those quircks would always be the only reference we have to compare against.
> I don't think they are saying that the universe itself can't "run" the "computations", but
> that part is not clear.
I thought they were clear when they said "He says there is an implicit assumption when physicists say that SchrÃdingerâ(TM)s equation can describe macroscopic systems. This assumption is that the equations can be solved in a reasonable amount of time to produce an answer."
So, if you can't solve the equation for an answer, you can't make a prediction. Take the system of the cat in the box, it is commonly said that the cat should be in a superposition of states but... that isn't based on someone solving the wave function....that is a guess based on understanding the general form of the wave function. Nobody can actually solve the wave function for a real system to the point that it completely represents an entire cat in a superposition.
Since they can't do that, the prediction that the cat should be in a superposition is not a valid hypothesis; it is more like a guess at what the testable result would be if you could compute it.
Not so sure about that. The very fact that this is news tells me:
1. It doesn't happen too often. There have been a handful of these... over the course of a few years. If it was happening every day, we wouldn't see stories about Linus chewing out some dev, nobody would bother posting stories like this every week or even month for long.
2. Since these stories have occasionally cropped up, I can't think of a single serious kernel story I have seen of any kind. SO the kernel must be in pretty good, stable shape if this is all there is to report.
> Let's wait and see. Perhaps some of these conditions don't hold in Europe for whatever reason?
You mean like it is all a bunch of unnecessary hoopla that costs way more than its worth for the nearly non-existent problems it solves?
Not only that but, its not like they add realistic sounds anyway. If you have an exterior shot of a car driving quickly down a road lines with trees, why is the dubbed in "engine sound" more natural there? It isn't what you would hear with the car driving by, it isn't what you would hear if you were magically floating in the air following the car like the camera is.... where is the wind noise? The bumps in the road? Wheels going over sticks? Leaves russling in the wind? Wind noise at the speeds in many of those shots should be loud enough to cause hearing damage over time....nobody faults them for not including that.
while that does make some sense.... I posted that before my drive in, and so I was thinking on my drive, and there is one definite way in which these systems are not superior to mirrors: Glare.
When sunlight shines on my mirror at the angles it does, it does not interfere with the reflection in the mirror. LCD screens shine light through the screen, rather than using a reflective surface.
I can't barely make out the image on my backup camera when the sun shines through the window onto the screen.
The only comparable issue with mirrors is at night with headlights, when lcd screens would really um.... shine.
> You can point a camera anywhere you want,
Yes but you can see more out of a mirror by just moving your head slightly, no need to reposition the camera for small adjustments, which can be significant at working distances.
> You'll most likely get multiple cameras, stitched views, and more coverage,
Maybe eventually. I would still like to keep my mirror in addition.
> I'd be happy just to get a good rearview camera on my motorbike. All I get to see in the mirrors are my elbows...
I had that problem too. It is actually a common problem, and good reason to check out the wide world of aftermarket accessories. Like... mirror risers or extenders. Swapping them out takes all of about a minute.
Except they already have the money. The real truth is likely that you are half right. However, they will not be "tackled". No, they will take their money, and existing expertise, and become the next version Kennedy and Rockefeller families.
40 years down the line, Mexico will be electing their children to office.
I have made the open offer before that anyone who thinks waterboarding isn't torture is welcome to explain to me why that is, as long as they can do it while being waterboarded until I am satisfied with what they are saying is the truth.
If you think that is easy and cheap....I have this bridge in NYC for sale, and man is it a steal!
You seriously think someone putting up those posters wont be found hanging from a brige with posters nailed to his corpse? These Cartels are not street gangs like we have street gangs now. They are better armed, better funded, and in some cases....are the police.
Shit the Zetas, ever heard of them? They were started by police.
There is no easy way out now that these monsters have been created. Created by naieve people seeking simple solutions. People who thought they could enforce away drug problems.... they failed to change addiction rates (their basic goal) and instead, created violent street gangs...here and around the world.
Now this is the result. The same result as alcohol prohibition gave us, except amplified because instead of a short 15 or so years, its been going on for generations now.
Frankly, every single one of those drug warriers who created this situation deserve to be strung up from their necks in appreciation for the mess they made while trying and failing to control people's desires.
> OKCupid is briefly bringing it to the attention of Firefox users and then allowing them to continue
> using the site unimpeded. As 'retaliation' goes that is pretty damn mild.
Agreed. I almost went off on a rant about this last night when I noticed that they allow anyone to click right through and use the site anyway. They are using their position as a bully pulpit, big deal. Its not like anyone is even prevented from doing anything.
> I am also getting rather tired of this 'making people afraid to voice their viewpoints' meme. The
> anti-gay movement is not even remotely afraid to voice their views, they are in a very strong position.
Actually I think you will find this is far less true than it used to be. Tolerance for the anti-gay crowd in general seems to be waning. In fact, so far, it seems every company that announces a gay-friendly policy or stance gets huge support.
I think the reality is, their position was never all that strong and was mostly perpetuated by the combination of a small number of vocal people who cared, and a large number of people who really didn't care that much and went along....mostly because they never had reason to think much about it.
Even as a teenager before I knew that I knew any gay people, even then I noticed that whenever it came up, it was always the same people, and they gave the impression of true physical revulsion at the very idea of gay sex.... a revulsion that I never experienced, even not being gay myself....not only that but that... other people...the ones nodding and going along with the haters... they didn't exhibit the same reactions either!
Overall, I think more people expressed anti-gay ideas out of fear of being branded gay by buliies or out of not wanting to make waves, than actually hated gay people.
Ahhh but it isn't just "labs will release viruses" but that labs particularly worried about really nasty viruses, will create them in order to study the possibility, leading to the very outbreaks they were created to study in hopes of avoiding.
Its not just labs working on viruses, but people being so worried about labs creating plagues that they create labs that create plagues as a result.