Why not just go "whole hog" and ban international flights??? That's the absolute way to prevent any bombing of airline flights!
Ban laptops (which removes another several hours of productivity for some folk), and attackers will use luggage. Ban luggage and they will use pants made of fibers with the requisite explosive materials that can be reformed in the lavatory on-board. Ban pants and they will insert them in their own body cavities, or have them surgically implanted.
At root, bureaucrats are scared of losing their jobs (and rightly so...they ARE inept), so they propose Draconian solutions that will garner them "good press," until (like TSA searches and x-ray'd baggage before them) are defeated. It is NOT IN THEIR SELF INTEREST to actually solve the problem; Bureaucracies have one goal: Perpetuate their own existence.
What is takes is a group of qualified citizens to address the issues, knowing that they will be disbanded after the solutions are proven to work. Focus on the outcome: Safe air travel!
For the past 30 years, I've watched RS descend in to the worst quality goods on the market. They bought into the idea that "low price" was key, and they always had the cheapest, shoddy products, getting worse and worse every year, until I finally gave up on them. Nobody would bother with them, when there are national chains (mostly wholesalers) with high-quality products and fair prices. Even ALLIED has had better quality, and a broader range of merchandise.
Radio Shack took their customers for granted, and their entrant into the laptop computer market with their TRS-80, affectionately (and accurately) called the "Trash-80" with typical of their lack of attention to customer interests.
So, low price (and low-quality, necessary to get those low prices) was their sole game, and management was incapable of figuring out they were on the path toward self-destruction.
Good riddance. The place always felt like it was full of "bad product" cooties to me!
I SHOULD have a right to privacy, to have my phone number concealed unless I reveal it, to stop all unsolicited calls from "business" numbers (but accept them from cellphones or land-line residential phones), and all other calls to have a unique "ringtone" (for first-time LEGITIMATE callers). If you're not in my "contacts" I PROBABLY don't want to hear from you, but we have to make an exception for "first time" callers, in case their valued friends we haven't yet talked to.
Damned little. It's another contribution of "Fake News" masquerading as professional expression. The issues are endemic to the society, but science has no special place in trying to focus on these issues, specifically. When medicine creates a "cure" that works for 90% of the population, it's not generally true that the 10% are people of color, or of a particular gender. The reduction of fossil fuel by-products is neither gender, income-specific, or native heritage related...the lack of reduction harms everyone equally.
I stood up for Science during the recent march. I did not stand up for bogus opinions masquerading as "facts." Show me the data supporting these conclusions, and show me how they differ from the population-at-large, and you might create some cred.
I am a female, with 55 years' experience in computer technology, and--yes--I've had to work harder than male co-workers in some cases to achieve the same level of recognition and compensation. But, I built a successful, remunerative, happy career without griping about the hurdles I've had to master. It's called being an adult, instead of being a whiner.
P.S.: I agree on the Windows Updates that delivery telemetry (above). I've removed all that junk, and my systems run smoother...and faster...without clogging up my system with "data for M$" and without using my Internet connection for something that appears to offer me absolute NO perceived benefit.
If M$ has competent quality control practices, this "telemetry" would have no value. I suspect much of it is used to justify their own internal practices ("See how many people never use XYZ feature? Let's not waste time patching that PoS.")
...I was being plagued by the utter unreliability of Windows Update in Windows 7 SP1...with my own LAN, and with all clients' systems. It's been a nightmare over the past three years, with so many different variations of Windows Update components and configurations showing up and breaking perfectly running systems.
But, I have FINALLY found a solution: It's Tweaking.com's "Windows Repair." (http://www.tweaking.com/content/page/windows_repair_all_in_one.html). For a mere $20 bucks, it's a clean, robust "reinstaller" that has cleaned up and improved performance of every system I've run it on (your single copy for $20 can be used on an unlimited number of computers, innumerable times). It's regularly updated, and it has never failed me, ever!
The process is simple: Do some one-time steps to clear common problems (it guides you), then run the "Repair" tool: It changes all the files, registry entries and permissions to what they're SUPPOSED to be...and, that includes Windows Update!. You run the program in "Safe Mode with Networking," and you run it twice!. Most computers take about 30-40 minutes to run the program once; the second run is the same duration, but takes care of "early-stage"changes that might of been incorrect due to "later-stage" fixes. Worst-case, I have one Windows 7 SP1 system that takes 1.5 hours/cycle...and, after two cycles, it spends about another hour doing "post-repair" updates and consistency checks. It does not affect ANY applications programs. And, it all happens without requiring your constant attention while it does it!
At the first sign of a problem (e.g., system gets sluggish, or updates don't get installed, etc.), I make a backup (usually overnight), then update and run Windows Repair...TWICE...and it's ready to use. It'll be a bit sluggish for the first hour or so, as the final stage of lots of reconciliation of different components get resolved.
I emerge with another, repaired, Windows 7 SP1 system, up-to-date and reliable. It can be another three-to-six months before I find it necessary to do again. I keep a record of when each computer has been "Repaired," so I can confirm that Microsoft's lousy quality control has finally corrupted something again...and I find time to restore the system to "fresh-as-new" state.
If you don't have this tool in your arsenal, you're wasting needless time trying to sort out a reliable source of information on how to fix some "0x85078630" error. If it's broken...again...just fix it, and go on with your life. I usually run my after business hours, while I'm enjoying time with my family. It runs for a long while...then you restart it, and it runs for another long while, but it only requires about 10 minutes to update the executable, and another 10 minutes to run it again. Then, leave it on overnight. You'll be a lot happy if you do!
NOW, I can safely let my "Windows Update" enabled (although I always use "Download, but let me decide what to install"), because...after Windows Repair...I can trust my Windows system. Gone are the days of running "Windows Update" all night long just to discover that nothing got fixed the next morning!
Because crooks keep being more inventive, finding new -- heretofore unanticipated -- ways of tricking users and software.
You might as well ask, "How many law enforcement officers are out there?" There will always be some to invest their inventiveness in making a quick "killing" instead of engaging in honest, hard work of designing products that people want. Computer criminals are not interested in the niceties of business, like marketing, and advertising, and customer satisfaction...they're only interested in finding an easy way to make lots of money in a hurry.
Abandoning Operating Systems is a cruel trick played by vendors who want the new revenue from upgrades...no matter what the cost in lost-business, learning-curves, and incompatibilities with existing practices may be to the customers.. Spending money on maintaining the security (even excluding features) of superceded products distracts from development of improved products, and is not in the vendors' self-interest.
Given that a new Operating system (retail) is in the $100-$150 range, I'd propose "Life Extension" service subscription, solely for security updates in the $30-35/year range...with a required minimum of 10,000 customers to keep maintaining the service. That provides enough revenue ($1,000,000+ per annum) to support a small, dedicated staff.
Frankly, there's no reason that a M$ couldn't engage in a Joint Venture with a small qualified, independent security firm to provide the service, with special access to proprietary information within the O.S. vendor.
It would be an investment in the rehabilitation of the O.S. vendors' reputation, because M$ has gotten quite high-handed in recent years, dictating (or even forcing) software on unwilling customers.who have existing businesses to run.
...I have 100% backups of every computer on my LAN, every night, stored to an external drive, one of three that I rotate among. The backups are automatic, concluded by shutting down the computer from which the backup was just copies to disk, every night. I have about a weeks' worth of backups on each disk, for each computer on the LAN, so I have about three weeks' worth of backups on hand. Rolling back is easy, and takes less than an hour.
I'll never understand how technologists--who claim they are professionals--can leave their own or others' computers unprotected by backups, automatically made ('cause if they're not automatic, they'll never get made).
Sure, anti-virus and malware detection is important, but my backups are the final defense against miscreants like those who create these malicious invasion methodologies.
Only a professional cares, but Aaron Swartz named his product RSS, and it's still RSS.
I live in RSS (Rssowl) every morning. I get all the news I need and can make selective choices about which ones I read (Google News, for instance, posts a lot of Sports crap I couldn't care less about, so I can see the title and know it's not worth my time to click.
I'm dismayed by the number of sites that no longer provide RSS feeds (I'm looking at you, Daily Kos), and I'm disappointed that RSS aficionados are letting the RSS clients slide by without improvement (Rssowl v2.2.1 was last released at the end of 2013).
We RSS BELIEVERS need to band together and tell the major sites they need to support RSS clients; the software's free, and they can still inject their ads!
...estimates of resource requirements (including time and budget) for software projects.
However, making estimates of Resource Requirements that will be acceptable to Management...that's impossible. It's amazing how so many people who've never tried can make such ignorant demands...and think they're being "fair."
I've done many project plans for clients, and when I give them the results, they always bitch. But, when the project is actually delivered, they finally agree that I was right in the first place. After that, it gets easier...which THOSE clients.
Fortunately, I'm now retired, and no longer have to suffer these dolts. And, MY projects are quickies that work within a few days, and I love to tenderly "evolve them" over multiple successive iterations, adding new features as I go. My latest one is about 15 generations into development, and I may bring it to market if I can find a suitable partner. It's a novel approach to easily-recovered 100% daily computer backups. it's a much more practical methodology that doesn't require prescience before the first build is done to know every detail about the final product...it naturally evolves.
I'm with you...We're going to have to pass legislation on a national level to rein in Microsoft (and other greedy corporations) autocratic greed and forced customer behavior.
When has ANY product before this be forced on people by the vendor? (I understand federal needs for things like new features in automobiles. However, I do not accept that GM, or any other vehicle manufacturer, has the right to tell me that THEY can dictate to me what tires I must buy, or when, specifically, I must surrender my vehicle for "periodic service" on THEIR schedule, not mine.)
If you make a second stream of income from your products...like repair...there is a perverse incentive to design your products to require frequent repair. If you pay $800 for the cellphone, and get it repaired only infrequently by your local guru, you'll probably spend $1,000-1,200 over the full lifetime of the phone.
Now, if you can buy that phone for $500 (but I doubt they'll actually lower the selling price), you'll now spend $2,000-2,400 over the same lifetime, you are a customer worth up to $1,200 more to the seller over the lifetime of the product. The lousier the phone, the more repairs it will demand; the more repairs it demands, the higher the sellers' profit. It also will probably serve to reduce local sales tax revenues by shipping phones to where the service won't be taxed, so cities and counties will get poorer, and service will take longer (oh, but we'll give you faster service for only a slightly higher (50%) premium!)
This is a perverse incentive to drive quality down so as ti increase future "repair and service" revenue...by charging, say, $250 to replace a $50 battery, because a local business person, making a living off after-market repair, could do it for $25 for that same $50 battery. So, if the batteries replaced by the vendor are half as good as those provided by the aftermarket repair option, you end up paying lots more for the service your technology delivers to you.
This is how oligarchy works. If Congress and the Courts don't stop this perverse scheme to capture excess revenue through "restraint of trade," we'll probably all have to go back to land-line phones and keep our beloved Windows 7 computers for the indefinite future. The effects will produce short-term gains, and stagger our economy with higher costs and lower quality, causing the markets for new products to decline dramatically.
Hey, we have the congresscritters we let the largest companies pay for...so, what could POSSIBLY go wrong if sale no longer means "sale," but "lease?"
My paean to the IBM 1403, with which I've spent many loving days and nights:
The clunky printer attached to the IBM 709 "mainframe" computer was a slow, lumbering monster. But the practice, in the day, was to use the smaller (only $250,000) IBM 1401 computer to load decks of program/data punched cards onto tape, the tape "mounted on the IBM 709" "mainframe" for execution, then the program's output to be written to tape (our 709 had 8--later 12--729 tape drives), and carried back to the IBM 1401 for printing of results. A "job ticket" specified which card decks went to tape, and which tapes would then be sent to the IBM 1403 attached to the 1401. And, that was the marvel: It could print several hundred pages in just a few minutes, often as graphs composed of asterisks, dashes, and other symbols, representing the points on the axes and the data points computed. Crude graphs, to be sure, but very effective to show non-technical executives. All in marvelous black (or blue) on white paper
The 1403 was the star of the show. Nobody much cared about the support task of copying boxes of punched cards to tape. They loved watching the lights on the huge "front desk" of the 709, the source of most TV footage of "a computer at work," in the day. But, they loved the speed, efficiency, quality, and distinctive (but relative quiet of the closed-box printer cabinetry) sound of that 1403. It meant we had results to see! Those of us who moved beyond FORTRAN (the preferred language on the big 709) found the 1401 computer a delight to program, with a memory structure of variable-length words with a "word mark" bit to distinguish the end of a string of characters...an architecture I'd love to see revived.
But, the 1403 was the workhorse of the business, and its' star performer. When results of huge warfare simulation models, or Linear Programming model forecasts of macroeconomic possibilities, often with foot-high stacks of large, wide pages emerged from the back of the 1403...faster than one could read them...everyone looked for the "macro trends" of big areas of ink (or barren spans of white), they gave insight into the likely success or failure of the most recent changes in the models...and, occasionally presaged teentsy bugs that had created hugely errant results.
Given the technology of the day (the laser was yet to be invented) all these technologies in the emergent era of modern computers were marvels, and the IBM 1403 was the most effective tool of them all. Without that ability to produce massive reams of output for later analysis by mathematicians and programmers, and executives, and analysts, we'd've never made the subsequent leaps that have led to the cellphones we have today.
ANECDOTE: True Side-Story about the masses of blinking lights on the 709. We were hard by the Pentagon, and contractors used our "service bureau" at C-E-I-R for doing warfare modelling. Most programmers cleverly used control over some of the 709's console lights to indicate progress, or other information. At $800/hour (in the 1960's) it was important to know of the results were likely to be good or bad, so we could quickly terminate the latter to save money. One fellow was building naval warfare simulation models, considering different weapons and tactics to maximize the achievement of battle outcomes, and he used one bank of lights to indicate which kinds of targets were being destroyed in the simulated battle. One day, I'm watching the lights flickering at a decent rate, when the programmer in charge of building and testing the model was watching those lights blinking, and suddenly, leapt out of his chair, reaching for the "kill" button, exclaiming, at the top of his lungs, "The Damned Thing's Attacking CARGO Ships!!!", as he pressed the button to reset the computer! No 1403 output from THAT job.:-)
If Google ever decides to implement the Windows-equivalent model for third-party applications (i.e., more than WINE) and "HAL", it will...for the first time since Windows v1...establish that there is a serious competitor to Windows. We have needed a competitor to Microsoft's dominant OS for a long, long time, if for no other reason than to keep them "honest" (as contrast with, say, the "Free Windows 10" gag that basically thrust all "Beta Testing" onto unsuspecting geeks, which led to the arrogance they exhibit with "we'll decide for you when you should update your system!") And, the arrogance they exhibit with egregious changes in User "Agreements" over the past two years, turning customers into serfs.
But, for both of these oversized behemoths, you must remember this: If you're not PAYING for the product, you ARE the product being sold. Windows AND Android users are ripe for a revolution against a high-handed, self-interested purveyors of the sole remaining products without competitors, because their respective GUIs are so ubiquitous.
You clearly do not understand the rigor, and attenten to detail, demanded of pilots on EVERY approach. There are specific instrument indications every pilot is expected to meet at each phase (or marker) of the approach. Any commercial pilot who arrives over the "rabbit" (the lights at the approach end of the runway) with excess airspeed of more than about 25 knots would be sent off to remedial training, unless he had a specific emergency condition requiring the excess speed.
Oh, and now try to control the aircraft with the wheels on the ground, when the nosewheel keeps aggressively trying to turn "downhill." Now, do it in poor visibility. Remember: Takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory.
You're obviously not a pilot...and simulators are very, very sophisticated in the past 30 years. I flew the F-5 simulator once. The F-5 has the odd side-effect that when you first release the brakes, the "nose" bounces up an down slightly for a few seconds. Even THAT detail was clearly reproduced in the version I "flew."
Slashdot Mirror
...problems like these.
Why not just go "whole hog" and ban international flights??? That's the absolute way to prevent any bombing of airline flights!
Ban laptops (which removes another several hours of productivity for some folk), and attackers will use luggage. Ban luggage and they will use pants made of fibers with the requisite explosive materials that can be reformed in the lavatory on-board. Ban pants and they will insert them in their own body cavities, or have them surgically implanted.
At root, bureaucrats are scared of losing their jobs (and rightly so...they ARE inept), so they propose Draconian solutions that will garner them "good press," until (like TSA searches and x-ray'd baggage before them) are defeated. It is NOT IN THEIR SELF INTEREST to actually solve the problem; Bureaucracies have one goal: Perpetuate their own existence.
What is takes is a group of qualified citizens to address the issues, knowing that they will be disbanded after the solutions are proven to work. Focus on the outcome: Safe air travel!
For the past 30 years, I've watched RS descend in to the worst quality goods on the market. They bought into the idea that "low price" was key, and they always had the cheapest, shoddy products, getting worse and worse every year, until I finally gave up on them. Nobody would bother with them, when there are national chains (mostly wholesalers) with high-quality products and fair prices. Even ALLIED has had better quality, and a broader range of merchandise.
Radio Shack took their customers for granted, and their entrant into the laptop computer market with their TRS-80, affectionately (and accurately) called the "Trash-80" with typical of their lack of attention to customer interests.
So, low price (and low-quality, necessary to get those low prices) was their sole game, and management was incapable of figuring out they were on the path toward self-destruction.
Good riddance. The place always felt like it was full of "bad product" cooties to me!
I SHOULD have a right to privacy, to have my phone number concealed unless I reveal it, to stop all unsolicited calls from "business" numbers (but accept them from cellphones or land-line residential phones), and all other calls to have a unique "ringtone" (for first-time LEGITIMATE callers). If you're not in my "contacts" I PROBABLY don't want to hear from you, but we have to make an exception for "first time" callers, in case their valued friends we haven't yet talked to.
Sorry, but your ignorance about "trans" is showing. Yes, they often DO know at three...and there's scientific evidence of that face (search PubMED).
Damned little. It's another contribution of "Fake News" masquerading as professional expression. The issues are endemic to the society, but science has no special place in trying to focus on these issues, specifically. When medicine creates a "cure" that works for 90% of the population, it's not generally true that the 10% are people of color, or of a particular gender. The reduction of fossil fuel by-products is neither gender, income-specific, or native heritage related...the lack of reduction harms everyone equally.
I stood up for Science during the recent march. I did not stand up for bogus opinions masquerading as "facts." Show me the data supporting these conclusions, and show me how they differ from the population-at-large, and you might create some cred.
I am a female, with 55 years' experience in computer technology, and--yes--I've had to work harder than male co-workers in some cases to achieve the same level of recognition and compensation. But, I built a successful, remunerative, happy career without griping about the hurdles I've had to master. It's called being an adult, instead of being a whiner.
P.S.: I agree on the Windows Updates that delivery telemetry (above). I've removed all that junk, and my systems run smoother...and faster...without clogging up my system with "data for M$" and without using my Internet connection for something that appears to offer me absolute NO perceived benefit.
If M$ has competent quality control practices, this "telemetry" would have no value. I suspect much of it is used to justify their own internal practices ("See how many people never use XYZ feature? Let's not waste time patching that PoS.")
...I was being plagued by the utter unreliability of Windows Update in Windows 7 SP1...with my own LAN, and with all clients' systems. It's been a nightmare over the past three years, with so many different variations of Windows Update components and configurations showing up and breaking perfectly running systems.
But, I have FINALLY found a solution: It's Tweaking.com's "Windows Repair." (http://www.tweaking.com/content/page/windows_repair_all_in_one.html). For a mere $20 bucks, it's a clean, robust "reinstaller" that has cleaned up and improved performance of every system I've run it on (your single copy for $20 can be used on an unlimited number of computers, innumerable times). It's regularly updated, and it has never failed me, ever!
The process is simple: Do some one-time steps to clear common problems (it guides you), then run the "Repair" tool: It changes all the files, registry entries and permissions to what they're SUPPOSED to be...and, that includes Windows Update!. You run the program in "Safe Mode with Networking," and you run it twice!. Most computers take about 30-40 minutes to run the program once; the second run is the same duration, but takes care of "early-stage"changes that might of been incorrect due to "later-stage" fixes. Worst-case, I have one Windows 7 SP1 system that takes 1.5 hours/cycle...and, after two cycles, it spends about another hour doing "post-repair" updates and consistency checks. It does not affect ANY applications programs. And, it all happens without requiring your constant attention while it does it!
At the first sign of a problem (e.g., system gets sluggish, or updates don't get installed, etc.), I make a backup (usually overnight), then update and run Windows Repair...TWICE...and it's ready to use. It'll be a bit sluggish for the first hour or so, as the final stage of lots of reconciliation of different components get resolved.
I emerge with another, repaired, Windows 7 SP1 system, up-to-date and reliable. It can be another three-to-six months before I find it necessary to do again. I keep a record of when each computer has been "Repaired," so I can confirm that Microsoft's lousy quality control has finally corrupted something again...and I find time to restore the system to "fresh-as-new" state.
If you don't have this tool in your arsenal, you're wasting needless time trying to sort out a reliable source of information on how to fix some "0x85078630" error. If it's broken...again...just fix it, and go on with your life. I usually run my after business hours, while I'm enjoying time with my family. It runs for a long while...then you restart it, and it runs for another long while, but it only requires about 10 minutes to update the executable, and another 10 minutes to run it again. Then, leave it on overnight. You'll be a lot happy if you do!
NOW, I can safely let my "Windows Update" enabled (although I always use "Download, but let me decide what to install"), because...after Windows Repair...I can trust my Windows system. Gone are the days of running "Windows Update" all night long just to discover that nothing got fixed the next morning!
Because crooks keep being more inventive, finding new -- heretofore unanticipated -- ways of tricking users and software.
You might as well ask, "How many law enforcement officers are out there?" There will always be some to invest their inventiveness in making a quick "killing" instead of engaging in honest, hard work of designing products that people want. Computer criminals are not interested in the niceties of business, like marketing, and advertising, and customer satisfaction...they're only interested in finding an easy way to make lots of money in a hurry.
Solve THAT problem, AC!
Abandoning Operating Systems is a cruel trick played by vendors who want the new revenue from upgrades...no matter what the cost in lost-business, learning-curves, and incompatibilities with existing practices may be to the customers.. Spending money on maintaining the security (even excluding features) of superceded products distracts from development of improved products, and is not in the vendors' self-interest.
Given that a new Operating system (retail) is in the $100-$150 range, I'd propose "Life Extension" service subscription, solely for security updates in the $30-35/year range...with a required minimum of 10,000 customers to keep maintaining the service. That provides enough revenue ($1,000,000+ per annum) to support a small, dedicated staff.
Frankly, there's no reason that a M$ couldn't engage in a Joint Venture with a small qualified, independent security firm to provide the service, with special access to proprietary information within the O.S. vendor.
It would be an investment in the rehabilitation of the O.S. vendors' reputation, because M$ has gotten quite high-handed in recent years, dictating (or even forcing) software on unwilling customers.who have existing businesses to run.
...I have 100% backups of every computer on my LAN, every night, stored to an external drive, one of three that I rotate among. The backups are automatic, concluded by shutting down the computer from which the backup was just copies to disk, every night. I have about a weeks' worth of backups on each disk, for each computer on the LAN, so I have about three weeks' worth of backups on hand. Rolling back is easy, and takes less than an hour.
I'll never understand how technologists--who claim they are professionals--can leave their own or others' computers unprotected by backups, automatically made ('cause if they're not automatic, they'll never get made).
Sure, anti-virus and malware detection is important, but my backups are the final defense against miscreants like those who create these malicious invasion methodologies.
Only a professional cares, but Aaron Swartz named his product RSS, and it's still RSS.
I live in RSS (Rssowl) every morning. I get all the news I need and can make selective choices about which ones I read (Google News, for instance, posts a lot of Sports crap I couldn't care less about, so I can see the title and know it's not worth my time to click.
I'm dismayed by the number of sites that no longer provide RSS feeds (I'm looking at you, Daily Kos), and I'm disappointed that RSS aficionados are letting the RSS clients slide by without improvement (Rssowl v2.2.1 was last released at the end of 2013).
We RSS BELIEVERS need to band together and tell the major sites they need to support RSS clients; the software's free, and they can still inject their ads!
...estimates of resource requirements (including time and budget) for software projects.
However, making estimates of Resource Requirements that will be acceptable to Management...that's impossible. It's amazing how so many people who've never tried can make such ignorant demands...and think they're being "fair."
I've done many project plans for clients, and when I give them the results, they always bitch. But, when the project is actually delivered, they finally agree that I was right in the first place. After that, it gets easier...which THOSE clients.
Fortunately, I'm now retired, and no longer have to suffer these dolts. And, MY projects are quickies that work within a few days, and I love to tenderly "evolve them" over multiple successive iterations, adding new features as I go. My latest one is about 15 generations into development, and I may bring it to market if I can find a suitable partner. It's a novel approach to easily-recovered 100% daily computer backups. it's a much more practical methodology that doesn't require prescience before the first build is done to know every detail about the final product...it naturally evolves.
But, science marches on; we are engaged, on an international scale, in LEARNING how the brain works, and getting better and better at it.
The AI community doesn't apparently even try; They just implement something and HOPE (e.g. Alexa, and kin). Just like novice programmers.
I'm with you...We're going to have to pass legislation on a national level to rein in Microsoft (and other greedy corporations) autocratic greed and forced customer behavior.
When has ANY product before this be forced on people by the vendor? (I understand federal needs for things like new features in automobiles. However, I do not accept that GM, or any other vehicle manufacturer, has the right to tell me that THEY can dictate to me what tires I must buy, or when, specifically, I must surrender my vehicle for "periodic service" on THEIR schedule, not mine.)
It's just another symptom of oligarchy gone wild!
If you make a second stream of income from your products...like repair...there is a perverse incentive to design your products to require frequent repair. If you pay $800 for the cellphone, and get it repaired only infrequently by your local guru, you'll probably spend $1,000-1,200 over the full lifetime of the phone.
Now, if you can buy that phone for $500 (but I doubt they'll actually lower the selling price), you'll now spend $2,000-2,400 over the same lifetime, you are a customer worth up to $1,200 more to the seller over the lifetime of the product. The lousier the phone, the more repairs it will demand; the more repairs it demands, the higher the sellers' profit. It also will probably serve to reduce local sales tax revenues by shipping phones to where the service won't be taxed, so cities and counties will get poorer, and service will take longer (oh, but we'll give you faster service for only a slightly higher (50%) premium!)
This is a perverse incentive to drive quality down so as ti increase future "repair and service" revenue...by charging, say, $250 to replace a $50 battery, because a local business person, making a living off after-market repair, could do it for $25 for that same $50 battery. So, if the batteries replaced by the vendor are half as good as those provided by the aftermarket repair option, you end up paying lots more for the service your technology delivers to you.
This is how oligarchy works. If Congress and the Courts don't stop this perverse scheme to capture excess revenue through "restraint of trade," we'll probably all have to go back to land-line phones and keep our beloved Windows 7 computers for the indefinite future. The effects will produce short-term gains, and stagger our economy with higher costs and lower quality, causing the markets for new products to decline dramatically.
Hey, we have the congresscritters we let the largest companies pay for...so, what could POSSIBLY go wrong if sale no longer means "sale," but "lease?"
My paean to the IBM 1403, with which I've spent many loving days and nights:
The clunky printer attached to the IBM 709 "mainframe" computer was a slow, lumbering monster. But the practice, in the day, was to use the smaller (only $250,000) IBM 1401 computer to load decks of program/data punched cards onto tape, the tape "mounted on the IBM 709" "mainframe" for execution, then the program's output to be written to tape (our 709 had 8--later 12--729 tape drives), and carried back to the IBM 1401 for printing of results. A "job ticket" specified which card decks went to tape, and which tapes would then be sent to the IBM 1403 attached to the 1401. And, that was the marvel: It could print several hundred pages in just a few minutes, often as graphs composed of asterisks, dashes, and other symbols, representing the points on the axes and the data points computed. Crude graphs, to be sure, but very effective to show non-technical executives. All in marvelous black (or blue) on white paper
The 1403 was the star of the show. Nobody much cared about the support task of copying boxes of punched cards to tape. They loved watching the lights on the huge "front desk" of the 709, the source of most TV footage of "a computer at work," in the day. But, they loved the speed, efficiency, quality, and distinctive (but relative quiet of the closed-box printer cabinetry) sound of that 1403. It meant we had results to see! Those of us who moved beyond FORTRAN (the preferred language on the big 709) found the 1401 computer a delight to program, with a memory structure of variable-length words with a "word mark" bit to distinguish the end of a string of characters...an architecture I'd love to see revived.
But, the 1403 was the workhorse of the business, and its' star performer. When results of huge warfare simulation models, or Linear Programming model forecasts of macroeconomic possibilities, often with foot-high stacks of large, wide pages emerged from the back of the 1403...faster than one could read them...everyone looked for the "macro trends" of big areas of ink (or barren spans of white), they gave insight into the likely success or failure of the most recent changes in the models...and, occasionally presaged teentsy bugs that had created hugely errant results.
Given the technology of the day (the laser was yet to be invented) all these technologies in the emergent era of modern computers were marvels, and the IBM 1403 was the most effective tool of them all. Without that ability to produce massive reams of output for later analysis by mathematicians and programmers, and executives, and analysts, we'd've never made the subsequent leaps that have led to the cellphones we have today.
ANECDOTE: True Side-Story about the masses of blinking lights on the 709. We were hard by the Pentagon, and contractors used our "service bureau" at C-E-I-R for doing warfare modelling. Most programmers cleverly used control over some of the 709's console lights to indicate progress, or other information. At $800/hour (in the 1960's) it was important to know of the results were likely to be good or bad, so we could quickly terminate the latter to save money. One fellow was building naval warfare simulation models, considering different weapons and tactics to maximize the achievement of battle outcomes, and he used one bank of lights to indicate which kinds of targets were being destroyed in the simulated battle. One day, I'm watching the lights flickering at a decent rate, when the programmer in charge of building and testing the model was watching those lights blinking, and suddenly, leapt out of his chair, reaching for the "kill" button, exclaiming, at the top of his lungs, "The Damned Thing's Attacking CARGO Ships!!!", as he pressed the button to reset the computer! No 1403 output from THAT job. :-)
If Google ever decides to implement the Windows-equivalent model for third-party applications (i.e., more than WINE) and "HAL", it will...for the first time since Windows v1...establish that there is a serious competitor to Windows. We have needed a competitor to Microsoft's dominant OS for a long, long time, if for no other reason than to keep them "honest" (as contrast with, say, the "Free Windows 10" gag that basically thrust all "Beta Testing" onto unsuspecting geeks, which led to the arrogance they exhibit with "we'll decide for you when you should update your system!") And, the arrogance they exhibit with egregious changes in User "Agreements" over the past two years, turning customers into serfs.
But, for both of these oversized behemoths, you must remember this: If you're not PAYING for the product, you ARE the product being sold. Windows AND Android users are ripe for a revolution against a high-handed, self-interested purveyors of the sole remaining products without competitors, because their respective GUIs are so ubiquitous.
Probably not in our lifetimes, if present trends endure. Consider one quark-per-bit???
And I ask you: Have YOU every dived off the highest diving board into an empty pool?
Hi, fellow pilot.
I hope you're enjoying this explosion of ignorance and conceit as I am.
To the rest of you: If you don't have a license, or are not an aircraft design engineer a warning: You ignorance is showing!
You clearly do not understand the rigor, and attenten to detail, demanded of pilots on EVERY approach. There are specific instrument indications every pilot is expected to meet at each phase (or marker) of the approach. Any commercial pilot who arrives over the "rabbit" (the lights at the approach end of the runway) with excess airspeed of more than about 25 knots would be sent off to remedial training, unless he had a specific emergency condition requiring the excess speed.
Just like building every IT system is just a "debugging" issue.
If you're taking that approach, why not just a circular runway, 2 miles across, giving you a 2-mile long runway in every direction?
See, I can fantasize, too.
Oh, and now try to control the aircraft with the wheels on the ground, when the nosewheel keeps aggressively trying to turn "downhill."
Now, do it in poor visibility. Remember: Takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory.
You're obviously not a pilot...and simulators are very, very sophisticated in the past 30 years. I flew the F-5 simulator once. The F-5 has the odd side-effect that when you first release the brakes, the "nose" bounces up an down slightly for a few seconds. Even THAT detail was clearly reproduced in the version I "flew."