Re: Subeditor needed!
The subeditor is still repairing the diesel on the VIIIC. He will bee bakk later this month.
11074 posts • joined 3 Jun 2008
The subeditor is still repairing the diesel on the VIIIC. He will bee bakk later this month.
With these kind of skills ... An acceptable systemd could be developed!
Was then when they got a CFO?
MOND is not a theory, just a fancy schoolboy trick of adding another term to the Newtonian equations of motion.
There might be something to it, but it's unlikely.
Under fascism, all of this could have been avoided!
Decide today, implement this evening. That is fast, efficient and just.
With some luck, our newfound Ukrainian friends will teach us how to perform.
It will only be days before someone builds a total Mohammed ...
"Microsoft released a comprehensive security fix in 2010 to address the vulnerability the Stuxnet virus exploited. As technology is always changing, so are the tactics and techniques of cybercriminals."
Not really to the point and sounds suspiciously like a politician trying to drown the latest scandal by stringing words together that at first reading nearly make sense but actually don't.
I wonder what the next excuse for another "easily access all areas" security "failure" will be.
Obama estimated that the government will bring in $100m by adding a charge onto the the H1-B
Frankly, he could get those 100m by looking under the lorry that leaves the Federal Reserve printshop on a daily basis.
I think the upper echelon really thinks people are utterly retarded. Oh wait, they are.
TOTALLY NOT IN A POLICE STATE!
Well, you really have to ask yourself: Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Workload management softer refines these data flows
There is nothing more satisfying than softening up the salespeople in the early morning through workflow management. It's like being on the business end of a rolling 155mm howitzer barrage. And then the M1A1s come.
You don’t get to replace the precise predictions of QM by slippery verbal reasons-why-you’re-not-yet-proven-wrong that change from one experiment to the next. Instead, you need to replace QM by an alternate mathematical theory that
(1) also describes anything that could possibly happen to a many-particle quantum system (not just one particular thing),
(2) agrees with all experiments that have already been done, but
(3) unlike QM, does not require an exponentially-large Hilbert space.
YOU HAD ONE JOB. "Quantum computers have failed. So now for the science" doesn't even manage to get the pants up.
the idea that action might happen at a distance
Because "admitting" that will lead you to the interesting idea that action can happen backwards in time and fuck you up six ways to sunday (just change the reference frame), so you better let it drop. And then you do your experiments and find that your system under observation clerarly cannot have any classical state before you squirt the classical bits out of it (see this) and you have to move the paper-writing hidden variabilists, oil droplets and all, to the "fun but not really relevant" category. Like with the winners of the special olympics you politely applaud but you don't tell them they did something amazing or shed new light on stuff. Bohm was there, he tried and came up with a Rube Goldberg device which is just a conceptual clusterfuck, only to be in accord with experimental results. The Occam Hair Transplantation procedure, as it were.
Im too lazy to pursue the classical handwaving into adequate equations, but I notice the FAIL at the last sentence:
And if reality is analogue all the way down, then quantum computers are just analogue computers, so their failure to deliver magical results is unsurprising. In fact, we'd rather see it as evidence that the emergent quantum mechanics research community may be on the right track.
Their "failure to deliver magical results is unsurprising", really?
First of all these results are not magical and of course they are analog. The "failure to deliver magical results" has to do with adequate production processes. No-one has yet said "that's odd" because the machine magically fails (which would be interesting). It isn't even big enough yet to exhibit such an interesting effect.
Not so long ago it was not at all clear that large digital machines could be constructed because errors due to stray voltages and flaky vaccum tubes may well propagate and swamp the delicate computation of the state machine. Amazingly, it was all solved and no-one except overclockers give this problem much thought today.
Also, Scott Aaronson in Collaborative Refutation.
"Third thought: it’s worth noting that, if (for example) you found Michel Dyakonov’s arguments against QC (discussed on this blog a month ago) persuasive, then you shouldn’t find Anderson’s and Brady’s persuasive, and vice versa. Dyakonov agrees that scalable QC will never work, but he ridicules the idea that we’d need to modify quantum mechanics itself to explain why. Anderson and Brady, by contrast, are so eager to modify QM that they don’t mind contradicting a mountain of existing experiments. Indeed, the question occurs to me of whether there’s any pair of quantum computing skeptics whose arguments for why QC can’t work are compatible with one another’s. (Maybe Alicki and Dyakonov?)
But enough of this. The truth is that, at this point in my life, I find it infinitely more interesting to watch my two-week-old daughter Lily, as she discovers the wonderful world of shapes, colors, sounds, and smells, than to watch Anderson and Brady, as they fail to discover the wonderful world of many-particle quantum mechanics. So I’m issuing an appeal to the quantum computing and information community. Please, in the comments section of this post, explain what you thought of the Anderson-Brady paper. Don’t leave me alone to respond to this stuff; I don’t have the time or the energy. If you get quantum probability, then stand up and be measured!"
Beer to that, Scott.
It represents a significant amount of money simply vanishing out of the the country.
You do know that is currently a currency war of historically unheard proportions going on, whereby various central banks are busy destroying the citizens' wellbeing by printing money in order to keep exchange rates at level supposedly favoring "exports" (I won't go into the fact that this amazingly disfavors the "imports" needed to generate the "exports").
Now money never "vanishes out of the the country" - it will have to be exchanged against some other currency, or even "hard money" (the horror!). Doing so will depress the exchange rate as more "GBP paper money" starts to accumulate in vaults. So this is good! Meanwhile, savings (eww!) abroad increase. This is also good, though maybe not for the economy of the UK if no-one bothers to invest there anymore.
What you actually mean is of course "money simply vanishes from under parental control of the nice UK state". That is something else entirely.
This sure will absorb a fat part of the 252%-of-GDP debt level of the UK, which has increased at the healthy clip of 30% since the start-of-the-recession. MUH AUSTERITY!
Considering that GDP numbers are currently artificially inflated by excessive use of the government's credit card, we might well be looking at 300%-of-actual-GDP debt levels and up.
I know it's all about pulling in the clicks but this is again a headline that will cause the /paranormal/ and /lizard-control/ crowd to come for a look-see.
Can we tone it down?
Name it and I'll show you 10 years old much better implementation.
Now under control of Oracle.
those original developers will drop out of Systemd work to pursue something else that is newer and shinier that they can mess up
It's like a neocon liberation army of development.
...against peasants, mainly.
Wasn't one of the reasons for secrecy that they were in massive violation of the Washington Naval Treaty
"Preliminary studies for a new class of battleships began after Japan's departure from the League of Nations and its renunciation of the Washington and London naval treaties"
ever watch Ghost in the Shell?
I didn't notice the Yamato making a guest appearance either in GiTS or GiTS: Innocence.
A lot of heavy nationalism and borderline revisionism in there.
Totally unlike the U.S., then?
we were totally unprepared for Iraq
Why not stay home in that case?
each with separate plans which were destroyed upon completion
Sure is gonna help repairs.
Meanwhile, national "newspapers" getting their information from SACEUR's shrill press releases and neocon suggestions are having a 24/7-hatewank about the permanent-imminent dangers of P.U.T.I.N.
We have arrived at Blairville, make no mistake.
"opt-out" is so rude.
I prefer the user-fiendly description "sideways option".
why the error had occurred during the mission's 911th Martian day
Do I smell a conspiracy?
This disreputable nonsense is truly getting out of hand, it's time we users revolted, big-time.
I blame 14 years of homeland security which has made anal probing by random smug people memetically respectable.
Take-home point: I hate you Java and all who sail in you.
You seem to not develop in Java, so do you mean "I hate the JVM" or "I hate the Oracle JVM" or "I hate the JRE package that Oracle provides" or "I hate Oracle"?
Enquiring minds etc.
I feel the urge for .Net runtimes. Now that Clojure has been ported...
Have you ever seen the containers of papers with official EU texts spewing forth from the printing presses? One could probably bury a small country in it.
It's impossible for a tax like VAT to hurt a company, since it is always passed on to the end consumer.
I don't know just how totally politician-level of utterly stupid one must be in order to not realize that upping the price towards the "consumer" (don't you mean "customer")? by 20% or thereabouts for no particular reason whatsover won't impact sales and thence "hurt a company".
1) Buy a book at Amazon
2) Check the that nice slip of paper that comes with it (commonly called an "invoice" or "bill")
4) 3% VAT
You can't just charge the VAT rate you bloody well like.
I would also like to see the EU-whatever-retardo-decision-group-of-the-week lovingly treated to a healthy dose of Zyklon B to tell them in no uncertain terms that Orwellianically deciding that people just don't pay enough to the loving, indispensable state for the privilege of buying a book is just not on.
"VAT is a luxury tax."
what complete and utter bollocks
Downvoted for stating facts?
The commentariat is even more outrageously retarded as usually.
Light gets bent, big-time
I think that should be "minimal (proper) time"
El Reg will now find some old mechanic dude who worked on subs and make him editor.
But some customers deferred purchases due to some lingering economic uncertainty
"lingering" as in "this Chernobyl reactor core sure has been lingering during the last 2 seconds"?
If it even exists and hasn't been made up by journosensationalists.
So maybe extrem e wealth implied a longer lasting relationship with the environment capable of sustaining life for generations rather than a magpie habit of putting stuff (usually non-perishable?) in safe places?
Superior new age eco bullshit of impeccable pedigree.
People may have reached the healthy age of 40-50.
They still had to pay the taxman or hide the little they had from his prying eyes. While the leader of state and his sycophants accumulated gilded stuff on which to sit on.
It has always been thus.
a magpie habit of putting stuff (usually non-perishable?) in safe places?
Not very skilled in economics either. This is called "saving". It is what causes investments to happen. Unless (like now) financial repression goes full out like what happens currently (and happend in the roman empire a bit before the crash).
I don't know what exactly is going on but this seems like another case of NatGeo QUALITY reporting / reportutainment.
Explorers will attempt to uncover extreme wealth even if there isn't any extreme wealth to find. Does that answer your question?
I suppose you are able to answer your question yourself with "not really".
Wealth doesn't mean money, eg precious metals and jewels
How is the life in My Little Ponyland?
Oddly enough, some people prize knowledge over money.
Oddly enough, Conquistadors didn't. Oddly enough, "wealth" never meant "large libraries". "Excuse me peasant, would you indicate the shortest path to the next library or do you want me behead you after a short introduction to Christianity?". Yeah, I think not.
As for the vast tracts of land, jungles grow. Fast.
Once the debt-laden governments wake up to the fact that we are working on a scarcity model and make the taxpayer (and increasingly the poor mugs expecting pension payouts) do something about it
Oh, I forgot:
Just for reference, should any particular questions crop up.
Except if they are Nazi scientists.
"One of the persistent questions that people have, and not just specialists, but everyone wonders about where did we come from?"
Software archeology is as interesting, unfortunately not many old artifacts are left. Time to read Julian Jaynes one more time.
Yes, because that will lead to good products that are easy to recycle.
Makes sense only if recycling is your primary goal. A feel-good-factor selling, basically.
I actually want to use the product, too.
> and hire 40,000 new developers
Ok, now tell me:
1) How do you actually FIND 40'000 new developers (and I don't mean randomly hired grunts who know how to fire up an editor and code Hello World - real developers skilled in whatever stuff you actually want them to do)
2) What does this do to salaries (WHEEE!!)
3) How do you manage this kind of extreme bing-hiring in the first place?
> Hopefully it collects itself and deletes....Java is horrible, bloated and insecure mess.
> Which bit is ignorant? Seems spot on to me.
I have worked with Java since it was released in the mid-1990's
You are a re[dacted]. You know that JVM implementations have several types of GC and there are quite a few GCs for specialized applications?
> Java's mark/sweep methods are inherently non-deterministic
The only deterministic methods when GCing are those that have strictly pre-planned and limited memory usage. Good luck finding those outside of aerospace applications.
> I had finished a deterministic reference-counted garbage collector which after 20+ years is still running many major semiconductor
Yeah, I did that as a student, too. And then circular data structures showed up.
> 10+ million lines of code with no deletes and no memory leaks
Do you even know what you are talking about.
> go find someone else who has a taste for self-flagillation...
I hope somebody spell-checked your IEEE paper for you.