Rip and replace
How much of that 5G silicon is replacing already working Huawei 5G silicon by gubbermunt dictat?
Such e-waste.
6103 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2009
Especially when the entire stack from software to hardware works on exceptions, which may leave undefined state left and right
No, it may not. Any function/method that leaves undefined state around after a recoverable error is simply broken. All error signalling systems require this cleanup to be done, and exceptions make cleanup far easier because the language guarantees certain things will happen in a specific order when an exception is thrown.
So you've actually got somewhere to put that cleanup - such as a destructor or "finally".
You can write terrible code in any language.
Irrecoverable errors are different of course, and again exceptions help there as it gives you a single global place to catch all irrecoverable errors and package up some kind of fault report so maybe you can make it recoverable in future, or avoid the irrecoverable state entirely.
Land doesn't use the Internet, people do.
The real problem is that they're only bothering with the highest density housing - flats and some HMOs.
It's also basically impossible to find out where they're planning to install until they start digging up the road - and often not even then.
Worst, most new build estates are not being set up with FTTP even though it'd be really cheap to do.
The original idea was to give an inventor a state-protected monopoly for a time in return for publishing how their machine works.
Otherwise they would have no protection from a competitor reverse-engineering their machine and taking their market away.
It broke when the USPTO stopped doing their job and decided the courts should do it instead.
gcc Is right to warn you about unsigned >= 0.
Writing that implies you think it's signed, which leads to other mistakes.
Warnings in 3rd party libraries is why cmake (and other build systems) allow you to give subprojects (and their headers) different warnings levels.
Of course, the same technique also gives you some new footguns, which is nice...
That's why they're warnings, not errors.
What they're supposed to do is get you to look at the code, because it usually means somebody made a typo.
Eg a flow clause that has no effect or is constant is almost always a mistake.
What some people do is just turn off the warning.
When a company kills your partner via an obviously unsafe working practice, prosecution doesn't restore them to life either.
Laws cannot ever un-do an event, they aren't time travel machines.
Safety equipment and safe methods of work aren't free, so companies do the minimum they think they can get away with. Making the cost of not doing something too high is basically the only way a government can force a corporation to do it.
The theory is that GDPR should make it too expensive for companies to collect unnecessary data or to ignore properly securing it.
In practice, it seems only Luxembourg and Germany are bothering to enforce GDPR. That's the actual problem.
They're basically Chromecast-like things, providing a local UI and streaming from a NAS somewhere on the plane. It's almost always Linux now because that runs decently on really cheap underpowered ARM that has guaranteed long-term hardware availability.
When they reboot the system they reboot all the little boxes.
They can also reboot individual "screens" if just one or two are misbehaving.
Amazon haven't published any data on intercompany transfers, which means they could easily have decided Amazon UK Ltd have to rent the Amazon name and AWS hosting from Amazon Tax Haven Ltd for a figure that mysteriously matches the profit they would otherwise have made.
Not saying they did, but they haven't published anything showing how they came up with their pre-tax profit figure
Well, obviously?
For a start it's a touch keyboard, so the keyboard itself could be compromised.
There have been well publicised incidents where the endpoint was compromised to monitor messages sent and received by that endpoint passing them on elsewhere.
One thing that is not clear is what is actually sent when you make an abuse report. Are you giving them the last five messages, last five days, back to the dawn of time, or even access to future messages?
Eg if it sends the key then your report effectively contains everything, both past and future.
And that's why it's dead.
If it was a RAD wrapper around a "real" language then it might have a future, because they'd be spending all their effort on making the RAD easier to use and directly supporting more concepts. Plus users would be able to write their own extensions using the same language - thus creating the possibility of an actual community around it.
Instead, their effort is split between writing the RAD, the language constructs, runtime and compiler. Thus all suffer, as each of those is a very large job.
Or Logo and play with a turtle.
Technically, Logo was the first language I was "officially" taught. I learned BASIC on my own.
Frankly, this company is already dead. It's all over bar the shouting. The moment one group of schools start asking why they're paying that £X/pcm, they'll all switch to something else and poof, dead.
There are a lot of "toy" languages used to teach core programming techniques, some are better for absolute beginners, others have a higher initial step but much longer useful life.
The GUI tends to be the differentiator. Really, it makes far more sense to build a good GUI teaching framework around a "real" language (Logo is Lisp!) and spend your effort on those visible tools, instead of inventing toy syntax and having kids quickly hit the limits of what's sanely achievable - and getting bored.
The AI would need to be declared a Natural Person.
Which they would need anyway, as otherwise they would have no protection at all.
A patent isn't much use if you are owned by someone, especially when your owner can just turn you off or dismantle you for no particular reason - or worse, the company who write the software platform you run on can arbitrarily end your licence to exist upon it.
TBH I don't blame the pilots for continuing. It's certainly plausible, nay, likely that it was the safest option.
Speed is life, altitude is life insurance and all that.
More likely, nobody properly considered non-optimal flight paths when filing the paperwork planning the flight.
No, it's going to stash the pack of sample tubes in an easily collected bucket, and leave the bucket partially-buried in a well-marked location.
The sample return mission simply has to land within a few km (but not too close!), then send out a small collection rover to pick up the bucket with its robot arm, and drive back to the landing site.
This part is well-proven, all been done before several times. The landing ellipse is quite small - Perseverance was well within its 7.7 x 6.6km ellipse.
Then it has to reach orbit and come back to Earth.
This part is difficult, but only in degree, not in kind.
As it's a logical consequence of their approach of "approve everything and let the courts decide" coupled with the "sue it or lose it" principle.
It costs Spring nothing to deny on spurious grounds, but permitting something that breaches a bogus, inadmissible but nevertheless approved trademark costs them a lot to defend.
So yeah, it is the USPTO at fault.
At some point there will be the very hard decisions - whether to continue operating the ISS and replace some of the oldest modules, or dismantle it and build an entirely new station - perhaps re-using parts, perhaps not.
Or give up entirely, but I don't consider that to be an option.
I would assume that it's better to replace modules.
Trouble is of course that replacing the oldest modules means going via a state where the ISS is in two or more rather large and massive pieces.
Doing that without hitting anything or overstressing any joints may not be safely feasible - How big a lump can Canadarm2 safely move?
The rest of the world is rapidly approaching the same point. There are far more pensioners per worker in eg Europe than there have ever been before, and the ratio is getting worse.
If you're under 50, don't plan on ever retiring unless you are a politician, civil servant or "top" banker. You won't be able to afford to.
Win10 (finally) handles mixed-DPI screens, Win+Arrow snapping, and I like the taskbar-on-all-screens options.
Erm... think that's it. Can we roll back the rest?
To be honest I'd be reasonably happy with the new-style Settings/Control Panel if it was all there, but even now it kicks me into the old one half the time.
I have several programs that I use once a month at most - expenses and the like.
I have NFC what they're actually called, because I hardly ever use them. Some of them have "real" names (as found by Search) that bear no resemblance to the task or the name in the titlebar when it's running.
I have a few where I've got multiple versions. I have to keep multiple versions because customers send me drawings and documents in those versions, and I can't force them to upgrade.
All the versions have the same name of course, they're just in a Start folder with the version.
I have several (dunno how many) where the Start link sets important command line options. I only know this because I had a peek - a normal user wouldn't have a clue
Yup. The indentation rules bite me every time I need to move code around.
I also haven't found a decent Python editor yet. Plenty of editors at the level of syntax-highlighter, but none doing the auto-complete and code navigation that prevent tyops and make it feasible to get up to speed with a large codebase.
Most active Github projects have a few github actions defined, which are written in YAML therefore YAML is the most popular language on Github.
That's obviously wrong, but is basically the same reasoning. Python is now very popular for writing project build & packaging scripts as unlike bash, cmd or powershell you can use the same Python script on Windows, Linux and macOS, with only a small scattering of platform-specifics.
The actual project is written in something else, be that Java, C, C++, Rust, ECMAscript or whatever, but Python's in the repo so it gets counted anyway.
Most stolen TVs vanish from the back of vans - they have a box!
A modern TV is very large, very thin and very fragile. When installed in your home the box gets thrown away or hidden in the loft/cellar/cupboard of hiding.
A burglar isn't going to bother - it's not worth much without a box, and they'll probably obviously break it.
Is it not more likely that this is part of the one-time setup of the device, where it checks for a firmware update when first connected to the Internet?
Perhaps there's a bug in the original firmware, where a malformed response to the "Here's my serial number, give me firmware" would brick it.
A TV that's already done one-time setup might never do it again, and they fixed the bug?
Sure, they most likely could add this "feature" to a future release - but like you and many others said, can't trust that, as it involves a rather large back-end and is so trivially exploited.
I've been more places than you've had hot dinners, as they say.
20 US fluid ounces isn't a US pint. It's 20 US fluid ounces. Check with federal weights and measures.
It is however slightly larger than an Imperial pint. I'm undecided whether I like the extra 23ml or not.
Either way, 1 litre is definitely too much beer in one go.
Usually it's "ticks since epoch".
The tick is usually days, seconds, or milliseconds, and the epoch... varies somewhat (though 1900-01-01 00:00:00.000 is common)
CSV is an undefined text format, so all data re-encoded as such is suspect, always misinterpreted and often mangled beyond recognition.
They demanded to be paid in a way explicitly prohibited in the documents.
So NASA were contractually obliged to reject BO's bid anyway.
On top of that, the only thing they've actually got is an engine. It's a good engine, well designed and manufactured, supports multiple relights, throttles well and seems pretty reliable.
But an engine is not a rocket, as NASA well knows.
SpaceX were the only bidders who actually met the requirements.
Now, if Bezos was claiming the requirements were rigged, perhaps he'd have a case. But he's not.
Apple are proposing searching iDevices for known CSAM images.
Anyone abusing kids to create new images cannot be detected this way, by definition.
So one fairly obvious consequence is an increase in abuse as people try to create new, undetectable images by abusing more, new victims.
As a parent, that terrifies me.