If he isn't prosecuted for downloading a song he doesn't have rights to, is this grounds for Estoppel if the record company prosecutes others for downloading the song without prosecuting him? Is this fodder for NYCL?
It's a matter of cost. If you wanted to do years of paperwork for every bug fix change order which included review of all other code in the system using the same paradigm for every change, you too could make your system nearly bug free. It costs IIRC over $100/line for the code thus more code than is needed, speculative additions, and easter eggs are both too expensive and too difficult to route through the process. One requirement in safety critical design is the removal of every line of code that cannot trace it's functionality to the approved system requirements.
But, when you design a bridge as a Professional Engineer, you are taking personal responsibility for it and your arse is on the line. When you write a faulty inventory management system, the result is "OOPS my bad, here's the bill."
I inherited a bunch of labview code which was part of a million line software system with 13 different compilers and 3 architectures. The biggest problem I found was that there was no good way of doing version control on labview VI's. It's hard to tell if anything changed. I also never found a way to run them in an automated fashion to do testing such that I could be sure that the same control inputs had been applied each time. Labview may be good for convenience but it's death to a non-trivial system that has to be maintained over human generations.
Whoever wrote this headline has an agenda. This is simply the abstract of a paper that analyzes the validity of uncertainty calculations and uses the LHC as an example of how to perform a better uncertainty calculation.
Real applications have nothing to do with the LHC but instead are likely to involve failure probabilities in safety systems and other situations where models are used and occasionally given unreasonably low uncertainties.
In short, this paper probably has grand applicability to software in products adherent to IEC 61508 and no applicability to the LHC. Try this example: you estimate the mean time between failures of your code to be 20,000 hours plus or minus 1000 hours. Your colleagues know you make completely boneheaded mistakes in 50% of your calculations. This means that given your work, the conditional probability of the actual answer being 20,000 hours plus or minus 1000 is a lot lower than it otherwise would have been and this conditional probability is not the same thing as the probability of the actual event.
What would cure you is the SI unit of storage space. All you have to do is measure disk sizes in kibibytes and you're good to go. It's kibi from kilo-binary and Mebi for megabinary. Using the SI units, if you have a 200Mebibyte disk then you know it's 200*2^20 bytes rather than trying to guess whether they actually meant 200*1e6 bytes.
Mass is so much fun in the English unit of slugs. One lb is then 1 slug*ft/s^2. It may not be stones but you'd sure have to be stoned to want to do engineering work in these retarded uints.
My experience has been that the compact flourescent bulbs for a commercial style recessed can light are fine reliability wise whereas the ones that screw into a light socket aren't even worth screwing in due to unreliability.
I believe this to be due to the fact that real commercial can lights that take the 24 watt compact tubes use a heavy duty external ballast.
It is the ballast that typically fails in CFL's because little tiny components packed into a tiny space by incompetent people are doomed to failure. Some folks on another group have taken apart and analyzed the ballasts and it is not encouraging and potentially dangerous.
This report does absolutely nothing for the astronauts that tragically died. It attempts to extract valuable lessons for future endeavors.
The failure of the restraints under this circumstance is only significant in the context of future missions.
It means that future astronauts in a much less dire situation would be killed due to failure of their restraints even if no other mishaps beyond a temporary loss of control occurred. In this particular case, the TFA is pretty clear in pointing out that the crew was either dead or unconscious due to restraint failure which could have been prevented long before catastrophic breakup of the vehicle for which prevention is stated as the only remedy.
A loss of astronaut lives in an event that did not promulgate loss of the vehicle would be politically devastating and need not occur if more attention is paid to this system on future vehicles.
Of course, there are a number of pc based simulators that will let you run the apollo flight computer software and enter the override sequence used to save one of the apollo missions from a malfunctioning abort switch. Kind of powerful to see ~40 year old software work
There is a concord in the Udvar-Hazy wing of The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum out at Dulles. The Shuttle Enterprise is on static display at the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL.
In this respect, I'd have to call the show throwing incident this week a definite improvement in the situation in Iraq and one that Bush should have praised if he had any sense. If we can encourage show throwing over grenade throwing, we will have caused that part of the world to have adopted a much more realistic view than that of the extremist nitwits.
Couldn't somebody get state engineering licensing board to go after some of the so called RIAA investigators? After all, these are technical matters and if the cases were about bridges falling then one would be required to have a PE license to testify as to the technical matters.
[rant]I've helped two friends with low end vista laptops. Both were unbearably slow without turning off aero. UAC dialogs popped up whenever you needed to do anything related to system configuration and on one of the systems there was about a 1 second delay per UAC dialog because popping a UAC dialog caused a temporary video mode change. Perhaps there is such a thing a Vista box that works well but I'm not going to pay money to anyone to have UAC boxes pop up when I need to do something. I'm also not willing to deal with a machine where administrator is not really administrator.[/rant]
Doesn't the COCOMO model of software development tell us that communications problems are proportional to number of people squared in a development team and as a result teams above a certain size don't in practice function at all?
Unit errors are generally a sign in technical fields that a report hasn't been well thought out. No engineer proofreading this would have missed such a blatant error which means that an engineer didn't proofread it.
If an engineer did not proofread it, an engineer did not likely do it. Therefore, the content of the article was likely done by an incompetent hack and charging $279 for the report is a way of hiding the fact that it was written by a hack.
I know slashdot is not widely known for pragmatism but I salute the Alfresco folks.
They make one of the best pieces of software I've seen. The also allow you to deploy the GPL version free of charge while competitors in this space like EMC E-Room and Documentum have 5, 6, or 7 figure license fees and astronomical support costs for their inferior (P.O.S.) CM products.
Matt Assay is a reasonable guy who does a lot for the OSS community. Alfesco Community Edition/Labs meets the needs of folks who need to deploy a basic document management system but have no budget.
I used Alfresco for a program at work that had developed a tower of babel of missing documents. It solved the problem well and and added no up-front cost. It's running on a broke down old linux box that was up for the trash can.
The need for extensions and custom stuff is minimal unless you start doing complicated stuff. If you want to do that kind of complicated stuff and don't have the Enterprise Edition, it's more likely that your organization is cheap a$$ and unwilling to pay for anything than Alfresco's terms being unreasonable. Just try seeing if EMC or Documentum will return your phone calls. . .
Suggest she apply at Harvey Mudd College "The Liberal Arts College of Science and Engineering" Four years of hanging out with people that all had those qualifications will give her a chance to figure out what she likes. (I'm not unbiased because I went to Harvey Mudd.)
The summary mentions blurring credit card and check number details to post such things on the web. It has been shown, and I believe posted on slashdot that the numbers can still be recovered.
I feel that the agilent scopes that run windows are a pain in the posterior quarter and in some ways seem to be a step backwards from the old analog scopes
Slashdot Mirror
If he isn't prosecuted for downloading a song he doesn't have rights to, is this grounds for Estoppel if the record company prosecutes others for downloading the song without prosecuting him? Is this fodder for NYCL?
It's a matter of cost. If you wanted to do years of paperwork for every bug fix change order which included review of all other code in the system using the same paradigm for every change, you too could make your system nearly bug free. It costs IIRC over $100/line for the code thus more code than is needed, speculative additions, and easter eggs are both too expensive and too difficult to route through the process. One requirement in safety critical design is the removal of every line of code that cannot trace it's functionality to the approved system requirements.
But emacs opened it as a dump of a binary file. I was bummed that they couldn't take the time to send me a proper virus for my architecture.
But, when you design a bridge as a Professional Engineer, you are taking personal responsibility for it and your arse is on the line. When you write a faulty inventory management system, the result is "OOPS my bad, here's the bill."
I inherited a bunch of labview code which was part of a million line software system with 13 different compilers and 3 architectures. The biggest problem I found was that there was no good way of doing version control on labview VI's. It's hard to tell if anything changed. I also never found a way to run them in an automated fashion to do testing such that I could be sure that the same control inputs had been applied each time. Labview may be good for convenience but it's death to a non-trivial system that has to be maintained over human generations.
Whoever wrote this headline has an agenda. This is simply the abstract of a paper that analyzes the validity of uncertainty calculations and uses the LHC as an example of how to perform a better uncertainty calculation.
Real applications have nothing to do with the LHC but instead are likely to involve failure probabilities in safety systems and other situations where models are used and occasionally given unreasonably low uncertainties.
In short, this paper probably has grand applicability to software in products adherent to IEC 61508 and no applicability to the LHC. Try this example: you estimate the mean time between failures of your code to be 20,000 hours plus or minus 1000 hours. Your colleagues know you make completely boneheaded mistakes in 50% of your calculations. This means that given your work, the conditional probability of the actual answer being 20,000 hours plus or minus 1000 is a lot lower than it otherwise would have been and this conditional probability is not the same thing as the probability of the actual event.
What would cure you is the SI unit of storage space. All you have to do is measure disk sizes in kibibytes and you're good to go. It's kibi from kilo-binary and Mebi for megabinary. Using the SI units, if you have a 200Mebibyte disk then you know it's 200*2^20 bytes rather than trying to guess whether they actually meant 200*1e6 bytes.
Mass is so much fun in the English unit of slugs. One lb is then 1 slug*ft/s^2. It may not be stones but you'd sure have to be stoned to want to do engineering work in these retarded uints.
My experience has been that the compact flourescent bulbs for a commercial style recessed can light are fine reliability wise whereas the ones that screw into a light socket aren't even worth screwing in due to unreliability. I believe this to be due to the fact that real commercial can lights that take the 24 watt compact tubes use a heavy duty external ballast. It is the ballast that typically fails in CFL's because little tiny components packed into a tiny space by incompetent people are doomed to failure. Some folks on another group have taken apart and analyzed the ballasts and it is not encouraging and potentially dangerous.
This report does absolutely nothing for the astronauts that tragically died. It attempts to extract valuable lessons for future endeavors.
The failure of the restraints under this circumstance is only significant in the context of future missions.
It means that future astronauts in a much less dire situation would be killed due to failure of their restraints even if no other mishaps beyond a temporary loss of control occurred. In this particular case, the TFA is pretty clear in pointing out that the crew was either dead or unconscious due to restraint failure which could have been prevented long before catastrophic breakup of the vehicle for which prevention is stated as the only remedy.
A loss of astronaut lives in an event that did not promulgate loss of the vehicle would be politically devastating and need not occur if more attention is paid to this system on future vehicles.
Of course, there are a number of pc based simulators that will let you run the apollo flight computer software and enter the override sequence used to save one of the apollo missions from a malfunctioning abort switch. Kind of powerful to see ~40 year old software work
Oops. Pathfinder is at the space and rocket center.
There is a concord in the Udvar-Hazy wing of The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum out at Dulles. The Shuttle Enterprise is on static display at the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL.
In this respect, I'd have to call the show throwing incident this week a definite improvement in the situation in Iraq and one that Bush should have praised if he had any sense. If we can encourage show throwing over grenade throwing, we will have caused that part of the world to have adopted a much more realistic view than that of the extremist nitwits.
Couldn't somebody get state engineering licensing board to go after some of the so called RIAA investigators? After all, these are technical matters and if the cases were about bridges falling then one would be required to have a PE license to testify as to the technical matters.
I hadn't realized that. I have worked almost completely in linux for the last decade and deal with windows only when people ask me questions. Thanks
[rant]I've helped two friends with low end vista laptops. Both were unbearably slow without turning off aero. UAC dialogs popped up whenever you needed to do anything related to system configuration and on one of the systems there was about a 1 second delay per UAC dialog because popping a UAC dialog caused a temporary video mode change. Perhaps there is such a thing a Vista box that works well but I'm not going to pay money to anyone to have UAC boxes pop up when I need to do something. I'm also not willing to deal with a machine where administrator is not really administrator.[/rant]
Doesn't the COCOMO model of software development tell us that communications problems are proportional to number of people squared in a development team and as a result teams above a certain size don't in practice function at all?
Unit errors are generally a sign in technical fields that a report hasn't been well thought out. No engineer proofreading this would have missed such a blatant error which means that an engineer didn't proofread it.
If an engineer did not proofread it, an engineer did not likely do it. Therefore, the content of the article was likely done by an incompetent hack and charging $279 for the report is a way of hiding the fact that it was written by a hack.
If by turning machine you mean lathe, I think it was patented in the 1700's ;)
They make one of the best pieces of software I've seen. The also allow you to deploy the GPL version free of charge while competitors in this space like EMC E-Room and Documentum have 5, 6, or 7 figure license fees and astronomical support costs for their inferior (P.O.S.) CM products.
Matt Assay is a reasonable guy who does a lot for the OSS community. Alfesco Community Edition/Labs meets the needs of folks who need to deploy a basic document management system but have no budget.
I used Alfresco for a program at work that had developed a tower of babel of missing documents. It solved the problem well and and added no up-front cost. It's running on a broke down old linux box that was up for the trash can.
The need for extensions and custom stuff is minimal unless you start doing complicated stuff. If you want to do that kind of complicated stuff and don't have the Enterprise Edition, it's more likely that your organization is cheap a$$ and unwilling to pay for anything than Alfresco's terms being unreasonable. Just try seeing if EMC or Documentum will return your phone calls. . .
Suggest she apply at Harvey Mudd College "The Liberal Arts College of Science and Engineering" Four years of hanging out with people that all had those qualifications will give her a chance to figure out what she likes. (I'm not unbiased because I went to Harvey Mudd.)
Compared to Javadocs, I'd say man pages are a gift from the dieties.
The summary mentions blurring credit card and check number details to post such things on the web. It has been shown, and I believe posted on slashdot that the numbers can still be recovered.
I feel that the agilent scopes that run windows are a pain in the posterior quarter and in some ways seem to be a step backwards from the old analog scopes