And if you can't comprehend that you used the sequence of letters "state" to spell out two entirely different words, then you can just wave your hands around and say nothing using a lot of words.
It is actually because of the differences in meaning that the different words are used, and it is because of the difference in meaning that the different borders are chosen!
Every one that played Eliza, I presume. You can't win the game Eliza, and you can't defeat Eliza at a game she hasn't agreed to play.
It is like saying, "How many Go patzers have been defeated by a tuna sandwich?" Every single one of them that sat down at a Go board across from a tuna sandwich and thought they were playing Go. Those are all losses by self-goal.
That's the big lie in comparing a region to a country; the country is probably also part of a region, and the work may be distributed across certain borders without any barrier.
That's just it, the idiots that want their data back that bad can only pay a few thousand. What a waste of time. And you know they'll cry about paying.
I'd want more than they'd pay just to spend the time trying, plus a lot more if I recovered something.
What about people who lost their pictures in a fire? They move on, they learn what is important.
Because the contents of the firmware are easy to audit. If you have customers that do factory inspections and pay for specific firmware to be installed, you can't hide anything there. You need something that isn't on the BOM to actually hide anything if you have big customers that send auditors.
They could start with a denial that is even a denial; when the headline says their review found no malicious chips "in" their motherboards, I assume they're telling me that the did find some on their motherboards.
I spent 3 years on a "deep dive" into EE basics, analog circuit design, then microcontrollers, and it really improved my software development a lot.
I don't think this is a natural blind spot in CS, I think it is just manufactured ignorance by dividing the fields in an unrealistic way. Which seems to have happened during the rush to train workers during the.com boom, so maybe it wasn't even thought out at all.
Even when a spinning drive made crunching noises, it is usually because the controller IC was hosed!
It isn't like a three phase low voltage BLDC motor operating at low load is likely to die; dead drives all come out with working motors. The drive may not spin when connected as a drive. But when I buy a box of salvaged HDD motors (by the pound) there are likely to be none that are actually bad. That's true even in a 25lb box, which is a few hundred motors, many of which came from dead drives.
And the head driver is basically just a voice coil; how often does the voice coil in a speaker go bad? Basically never. All the other hardware around it is likely to fail first. Same here. But if the wrong transistor dies in the controller, then the feedback loops won't keep it from crashing into the end of the throw, or oscillating in a way that makes a crunching sound.
Nice catch, I read right past that and didn't catch it; my parser rewrote it using the algorithm that corrects the "and and" mistakes, and I came away thinking he said "stick to real 9 track paper tape."
Nope. You're not paying for different control ICs, where you actually get something from paying more it would be higher speed or higher yield rates on the memory chips.
Higher yield rates will translate into lower runtime failure rates.
You're not going to learn much from the wrong side of the controller, because customers at all levels refuse to pay extra for built-in forensics. And you'd have to choose between extra silicon that normally isn't even used, or extra power use. It won't be free.
You have to get at the pins of the memory chips and interface them to forensic tool. Usually it is probably simplest to unsolder them and put them on a breakout board. You could typically get most of the data back that way. If partial data is really that meaningful to you.
Most people don't care; partial data is worthless to them. They either had a backup, or didn't. Probably only cops, criminals, and spies want people's data that bad.
Nobody pays extra for drives that have built-in data forensics, so nobody wrote the feature.
It isn't about crappy software, it is about software that only completes the assigned tasks in the most efficient way possible. That means they actually tear out most of the capabilities of the controllers in the process of making ASICs.
SMART is "fake" in the sense you mean it for spinning drives, too. Duh. There isn't a magic elf from SMARTland inside the drive. It is simply that less of the data is useful.
It isn't software in the sense that you talk about it, where you have a general purpose computer sitting there idle most of the time and you could easily just have it do some extra work. It is a tightly coupled collection of circuits that only do very narrow, specific things. Increasing the capabilities lowers performance, because that is how tight the timings already are.
My advice, buy a bag of AVR microcontrollers and write some firmware. Then buy a cheap FPGA and try that. When you can do both, you'll be ready to understand what goes into the "software" on a HDD.
You should get one of those "1000 Electronic Projects" kids sets and learn youse some hardware.
Sometimes the magic smoke comes out. Sometimes you don't even see the smoke come out. And yet, being encased in plastic so that you can't see the metal doesn't stop the ICs from letting out the magic.
Fry a few transistors and you'll understand, there is nothing to be unnerved about. The plastic covering that hides the IC is not even the magic!
His problem is philosophical, not technical. Why would a CS guy be good at philosophy? That would only be likely if he was also interested in philosophy, which is unpopular in CS echo chambers.
Does the act of constructing a narrative tell you what happened? No. Should possession of a narrative be a basis for risk assessment? No.
When some uncommon but expected event happens, if you felt like you succeeded at constructing a narrative or not does tell you anything about the frequency of the risk, and you shouldn't think you have that sort of information. Instead of admitting to feeling "unnerved," he should see this mistake and be embarrassed by it. Not because he's bad at philosophy and felt unnerved, but because he can't comprehend storage failure rates that are well-studied and have hard data available, and blathered about his bad philosophy instead of looking up the numbers and known causes.
Ultimately he should stop putting value on this "unnerved" feeling. It isn't a real thing; it is a feeling you get when you stubbornly insist on pretending you already understand things that you've received information that tells you don't understand. It is a type of cognitive dissonance. Dismissing the feeling, instead of assessing it as valuable, is the way to make it go away. Just accept the new information, and understand that feeling unnerved is maladaptive unless you're wandering in a dangerous forest trying not to get eaten by a Cave Bear.
There is absolutely no reason why using gravel instead of ice means you can't also plow.
You're just waving your hands and making up how you think things would be, instead of looking around and finding out how things actually are in other places.
Right, but attempts to get pedantic about the etymology entirely miss the point, which is about the way that people in a large part of East Asia see their governments now, and what the public viewpoints are that the governments try to pander to. Just like, people in the west refer to the Greeks as the founders of western culture without even knowing who the Greeks were, who the Minoans were, what any of the culture actually was, or how it differed from other ideas in different parts of Europe. None of that matters, people still presume some sort of common connection, and whatever the modern mythology is, that is what modern people base their cultural understanding on.
If China, North Korea, South Korea, and Taiwan were all on TV engaged in Battle Virtue Signaling, they'd all be trying to show the same virtues, they'd all be fighting over their version of who is the True Scotsman, but it would be who is the Truly Meritorious Confucian.
I just wish western governments would understand that, and try sometimes to position our squabbles so that we appear more Meritorious. Instead we perhaps appear pedantic and strident, like a strong person with some sour grapes who didn't learn to check them in the market. It hobbles diplomacy.
And likewise in the West, even the parts of culture that came from the Greeks weren't necessarily adopted by everybody at that time. And indeed culture existed before the Greeks.
A bureaucratic state is one where there are lots of employees in the government who wield power granted by some sort of multilayer bureaucracy with its own rules and levers of power that are largely not operated directly by a ruler. It is an aspect of government that can, and usually does, exist combined with some other aspect of government. Perhaps department heads are hereditary, or perhaps they are elected, or perhaps even appointed by an elected head of State. It differs from "autocratic," which also still leaves attributes undefined. (Machiavelli warned that in a traditional bureaucracy, if the Prince gains enough power and replaces the bureaucrats with magistrates, the ruling classes will revolt whenever the Prince is weak, and the new Magistrates will understand that their position is reliant on the Prince and will seek to stab him in the back at the earliest sign of trouble in order to gain the forgiveness of the rest of the ruling class.)
Communism, if the pedants were even correct, would exactly mean the government, the ability to regulate, the ownership, not the economic part which is described as Socialism. And to some extent Capitalism is an economic system, in that it is the economic system that exists when you have a government that is not involved in business and regulated markets in the way described in Wealth of Nations to create a level playing field for new capital. But it is a bit obtuse to claim it is somehow not a matter of governance.
Irrelevant. Each website is its own walled garden; there is not inter-operation between websites to share data. There used to be, and those schemes all failed because they were used to advertise and most users didn't want to participate once they hit a few "tourist traps" in the link exchange.
The things I'm talking about are things where your data goes to Company A, and somebody else's data goes to Organization B, and the data is routed between them using an open protocol.
Like the way email works. And for example in email, some people's email providers add ads, and those users are punished by having their messages end up in spam folders. So few messages contain ads. The market is resistant to paid advertising because it is hardened against spam attacks that neither Company A or Organization B would profit from. This reduces their ability to extract rent from the services.
They need a walled garden for the presentation of the app, so that they can present ads out-of-band to the communications. And if the protocol is open, other people will just offer free open source apps with no ads; the same way people install browsers and browsers themselves have no ads. Or didn't used to; some now do, for example on otherwise-blank pages.
2 words: Great Firewall. 1 answer: yeah we should stop that.
I would have gone with, no, we don't need to stop it, because it is already contained by their own firewall. We just need to adjust our border protocol settings to prevent leakage.
Slashdot Mirror
And if you can't comprehend that you used the sequence of letters "state" to spell out two entirely different words, then you can just wave your hands around and say nothing using a lot of words.
It is actually because of the differences in meaning that the different words are used, and it is because of the difference in meaning that the different borders are chosen!
Every one that played Eliza, I presume. You can't win the game Eliza, and you can't defeat Eliza at a game she hasn't agreed to play.
It is like saying, "How many Go patzers have been defeated by a tuna sandwich?" Every single one of them that sat down at a Go board across from a tuna sandwich and thought they were playing Go. Those are all losses by self-goal.
That's the big lie in comparing a region to a country; the country is probably also part of a region, and the work may be distributed across certain borders without any barrier.
Who is "we?" There is a unit mismatch in the premise.
Europe isn't a country, it is a region. When they decide to become a single country, then they'll be one.
To make this story honest, they need to add in Canada and Mexico to the US score. Then they'll have a reasonable comparison by region.
If China should be grouped with Australia and Japan or not, I don't know.
Anything this light is flimsy and impossible to service or cool.
Emitting photons doesn't have to weaken the materials, and LEDs are getting more efficient all the time; that means they run cooler.
I suspect the marketing is being laid on pretty thick here.
Ya thunk?!
The thing weighs 1300 grams and they call it the Gram to brag about how light it is.
If the 17" screen was 1" usable, I'd say that's pretty good, way closer to the truth than some of their other claims.
That's just it, the idiots that want their data back that bad can only pay a few thousand. What a waste of time. And you know they'll cry about paying.
I'd want more than they'd pay just to spend the time trying, plus a lot more if I recovered something.
What about people who lost their pictures in a fire? They move on, they learn what is important.
Because the contents of the firmware are easy to audit. If you have customers that do factory inspections and pay for specific firmware to be installed, you can't hide anything there. You need something that isn't on the BOM to actually hide anything if you have big customers that send auditors.
They could start with a denial that is even a denial; when the headline says their review found no malicious chips "in" their motherboards, I assume they're telling me that the did find some on their motherboards.
I spent 3 years on a "deep dive" into EE basics, analog circuit design, then microcontrollers, and it really improved my software development a lot.
I don't think this is a natural blind spot in CS, I think it is just manufactured ignorance by dividing the fields in an unrealistic way. Which seems to have happened during the rush to train workers during the .com boom, so maybe it wasn't even thought out at all.
Even when a spinning drive made crunching noises, it is usually because the controller IC was hosed!
It isn't like a three phase low voltage BLDC motor operating at low load is likely to die; dead drives all come out with working motors. The drive may not spin when connected as a drive. But when I buy a box of salvaged HDD motors (by the pound) there are likely to be none that are actually bad. That's true even in a 25lb box, which is a few hundred motors, many of which came from dead drives.
And the head driver is basically just a voice coil; how often does the voice coil in a speaker go bad? Basically never. All the other hardware around it is likely to fail first. Same here. But if the wrong transistor dies in the controller, then the feedback loops won't keep it from crashing into the end of the throw, or oscillating in a way that makes a crunching sound.
Nice catch, I read right past that and didn't catch it; my parser rewrote it using the algorithm that corrects the "and and" mistakes, and I came away thinking he said "stick to real 9 track paper tape."
Anyone *teaching* a CS program should be embarrassed about this.
He should spend a day standing in front of the EE department wearing a wizard hat and a sign, "Computers are Not Magic. I repent!"
Nope. You're not paying for different control ICs, where you actually get something from paying more it would be higher speed or higher yield rates on the memory chips.
Higher yield rates will translate into lower runtime failure rates.
You're not going to learn much from the wrong side of the controller, because customers at all levels refuse to pay extra for built-in forensics. And you'd have to choose between extra silicon that normally isn't even used, or extra power use. It won't be free.
You have to get at the pins of the memory chips and interface them to forensic tool. Usually it is probably simplest to unsolder them and put them on a breakout board. You could typically get most of the data back that way. If partial data is really that meaningful to you.
Most people don't care; partial data is worthless to them. They either had a backup, or didn't. Probably only cops, criminals, and spies want people's data that bad.
Nobody pays extra for drives that have built-in data forensics, so nobody wrote the feature.
It isn't about crappy software, it is about software that only completes the assigned tasks in the most efficient way possible. That means they actually tear out most of the capabilities of the controllers in the process of making ASICs.
SMART is "fake" in the sense you mean it for spinning drives, too. Duh. There isn't a magic elf from SMARTland inside the drive. It is simply that less of the data is useful.
It isn't software in the sense that you talk about it, where you have a general purpose computer sitting there idle most of the time and you could easily just have it do some extra work. It is a tightly coupled collection of circuits that only do very narrow, specific things. Increasing the capabilities lowers performance, because that is how tight the timings already are.
My advice, buy a bag of AVR microcontrollers and write some firmware. Then buy a cheap FPGA and try that. When you can do both, you'll be ready to understand what goes into the "software" on a HDD.
You should get one of those "1000 Electronic Projects" kids sets and learn youse some hardware.
Sometimes the magic smoke comes out. Sometimes you don't even see the smoke come out. And yet, being encased in plastic so that you can't see the metal doesn't stop the ICs from letting out the magic.
Fry a few transistors and you'll understand, there is nothing to be unnerved about. The plastic covering that hides the IC is not even the magic!
I'm not surprised.
His problem is philosophical, not technical. Why would a CS guy be good at philosophy? That would only be likely if he was also interested in philosophy, which is unpopular in CS echo chambers.
Does the act of constructing a narrative tell you what happened? No. Should possession of a narrative be a basis for risk assessment? No.
When some uncommon but expected event happens, if you felt like you succeeded at constructing a narrative or not does tell you anything about the frequency of the risk, and you shouldn't think you have that sort of information. Instead of admitting to feeling "unnerved," he should see this mistake and be embarrassed by it. Not because he's bad at philosophy and felt unnerved, but because he can't comprehend storage failure rates that are well-studied and have hard data available, and blathered about his bad philosophy instead of looking up the numbers and known causes.
Ultimately he should stop putting value on this "unnerved" feeling. It isn't a real thing; it is a feeling you get when you stubbornly insist on pretending you already understand things that you've received information that tells you don't understand. It is a type of cognitive dissonance. Dismissing the feeling, instead of assessing it as valuable, is the way to make it go away. Just accept the new information, and understand that feeling unnerved is maladaptive unless you're wandering in a dangerous forest trying not to get eaten by a Cave Bear.
A week is how long the gravel lasts on the road after application. Obviously, considering geography.
Has it really come to this? Are the new kids anti-intellectual even here now?
That's just derpy. We do have snow plows.
There is absolutely no reason why using gravel instead of ice means you can't also plow.
You're just waving your hands and making up how you think things would be, instead of looking around and finding out how things actually are in other places.
In Thailand they used to convert your merit to a number, and you had to wear the number on your shirt to be allowed to go in public.
The numbers could be added to or subtracted from at the whim of local magistrates.
Abolishing that system is also referred to as "freeing the slaves."
Right, but attempts to get pedantic about the etymology entirely miss the point, which is about the way that people in a large part of East Asia see their governments now, and what the public viewpoints are that the governments try to pander to. Just like, people in the west refer to the Greeks as the founders of western culture without even knowing who the Greeks were, who the Minoans were, what any of the culture actually was, or how it differed from other ideas in different parts of Europe. None of that matters, people still presume some sort of common connection, and whatever the modern mythology is, that is what modern people base their cultural understanding on.
If China, North Korea, South Korea, and Taiwan were all on TV engaged in Battle Virtue Signaling, they'd all be trying to show the same virtues, they'd all be fighting over their version of who is the True Scotsman, but it would be who is the Truly Meritorious Confucian.
I just wish western governments would understand that, and try sometimes to position our squabbles so that we appear more Meritorious. Instead we perhaps appear pedantic and strident, like a strong person with some sour grapes who didn't learn to check them in the market. It hobbles diplomacy.
And likewise in the West, even the parts of culture that came from the Greeks weren't necessarily adopted by everybody at that time. And indeed culture existed before the Greeks.
A bureaucratic state is one where there are lots of employees in the government who wield power granted by some sort of multilayer bureaucracy with its own rules and levers of power that are largely not operated directly by a ruler. It is an aspect of government that can, and usually does, exist combined with some other aspect of government. Perhaps department heads are hereditary, or perhaps they are elected, or perhaps even appointed by an elected head of State. It differs from "autocratic," which also still leaves attributes undefined. (Machiavelli warned that in a traditional bureaucracy, if the Prince gains enough power and replaces the bureaucrats with magistrates, the ruling classes will revolt whenever the Prince is weak, and the new Magistrates will understand that their position is reliant on the Prince and will seek to stab him in the back at the earliest sign of trouble in order to gain the forgiveness of the rest of the ruling class.)
Communism, if the pedants were even correct, would exactly mean the government, the ability to regulate, the ownership, not the economic part which is described as Socialism. And to some extent Capitalism is an economic system, in that it is the economic system that exists when you have a government that is not involved in business and regulated markets in the way described in Wealth of Nations to create a level playing field for new capital. But it is a bit obtuse to claim it is somehow not a matter of governance.
Irrelevant. Each website is its own walled garden; there is not inter-operation between websites to share data. There used to be, and those schemes all failed because they were used to advertise and most users didn't want to participate once they hit a few "tourist traps" in the link exchange.
The things I'm talking about are things where your data goes to Company A, and somebody else's data goes to Organization B, and the data is routed between them using an open protocol.
Like the way email works. And for example in email, some people's email providers add ads, and those users are punished by having their messages end up in spam folders. So few messages contain ads. The market is resistant to paid advertising because it is hardened against spam attacks that neither Company A or Organization B would profit from. This reduces their ability to extract rent from the services.
They need a walled garden for the presentation of the app, so that they can present ads out-of-band to the communications. And if the protocol is open, other people will just offer free open source apps with no ads; the same way people install browsers and browsers themselves have no ads. Or didn't used to; some now do, for example on otherwise-blank pages.
2 words: Great Firewall.
1 answer: yeah we should stop that.
I would have gone with, no, we don't need to stop it, because it is already contained by their own firewall. We just need to adjust our border protocol settings to prevent leakage.
For small enough values of "makes" to cover "assembles," yes.