Re: The HOW now seems more important than the WHY
So Brown caused the US sub-prime crisis? Nice to know a post-war British PM had some legacy
6324 posts • joined 31 Dec 2009
So Brown caused the US sub-prime crisis? Nice to know a post-war British PM had some legacy
What could they have done ?
The only power they have would have been to take over the bank of England (preferably involving the SAS bursting through windows) and raise interest rates to what people were paying on their credit cards. Cause a massive housing crash, 100,000s of evictions and raise the value of sterling to the point that totally destroyed any remaining industry.
Or Blair could have gone on TV and said, "the economy is going to crash in 45minutes/weeks/months, trust me" and everyone would stop bing big screen tvs
>What could possibly go wrong there?
Well they could all decide that they don't need any of that stuff, stop buying anything, keep the cash under the matress and suffer a couple of decades of deflation.
And that is if they are lucky and started off with a prosperous efficent technological economy - what would happen outside Japan would be much much worse.
Drive to Vancouver !
Despite to the wide diversity of eclectic entertainment available in America's own Peterborough - more and more seattle techies are taking advantage of the Canadian $ and live in Vancouver for the weekend.
But how can they possibly run a C19 railway system with 10year old operating system
Depending on the threat model that can be perfectly good,
If the physical access to the post-it note is secure - because it's in a room with guards - but the computers are on the net, then having a complex password written down can be the best security.
They shut off the generators but does that necessarily shut off the power to the computer controlling the generator?
Are they sure that a particular check disconnects all the many redundant power supplies to the GCU? Is this documented in the check?
The risk would be destroying any project which threatens the Office on Desktop/Server business - and the previous managers already did that,
The interesting bit will be whether he can get beyond the Gates era = "the Internet is new, it is a threat to Windows/Office we must dominate/destroy/own the Internet" to actually benefiting from new ways of using computers
If you are building software that can cause death or injury then YOU are on the hook anyway.
If you use GPL software you are responsible for any flaws in it in exactly the same way as software you write in-house.
Interestingly you are also responsible for any flaws in closed software you use - you have a much tougher job demonstrating to the regulators that you have a way of testing the COTS software to show that it doesn't have any flaws and have plans to remedy them. If you don't have a contract with the supplier saying that they WILL fix any flaws you find then your only remedy is to pull your product from the market.
It is far easier to build (or at least do the regulatory paperwork on) a safety critical system with open source software than closed
The same applies to hardware - I just spent the equivalent of a nice BMW getting a PC built by a certain CPU maker beginning with "I" - EMC tested.
It failed - despite the approval stickers all over its case. I now have to modify the PC to make it pass and show that I will apply the same modifications to all the other units I sell.
Unintentional harm - no.
Deliberately finding competing products and damaging them ....
And so it should be if the loss is still detected, reversed and the money returned.
If you have a contract with the bank which says that they are liable then you don't bother wasting money making your operations less efficient in the name of security.
Similar problem here with the 5/10c recycling on bottles/cans.
Mostly it works very well - an army of "independant contractors" with shopping carts mean you don't see many cans around. People even put their empty cans on top of rubbish bins to help them.
But you also get people with trucks who will collect everyones blue box, have a minion in the back picking out the cans and then dump the emptied blue boxes and their other contents in a pile at the end of the street before starting on the next block.
I think it was actually the giant spider that was to blame.
Similar problems in London "an incident" closed off access to our office - no problem as we had a backup site 1/2 mi away.
Trailed down to the street to find that the dear old bobbies of the Met (Total Policing (tm) wouldn't let us into the street.
If the internet tubes were made smaller then you could order the Kalashnikov (other assault rifles are available) online but it wouldn't be possible to deliver anything larger than a peashooter to your web browser.
They don't need to because they are dIGITAL(tm)
(capitalization is important)
Does her name mean anything in Thai by any chance?
> that only the American government can pop the lid on.
Obviously this would be unworkable, unfair and wrong. Instead the data will also be accessible by your own government, and security forces, and police, and parish council and those of any other Eu country.
The same keys will also have to be shared with all the agencies where the same software is sold.
So say 200 countries * 10 layers of three latter agency + 10 different levels of government + 10 different law enforcement agencies + the milk marketing board= 10,000 government depts havign access to your data.
I think knowing the existence of Tesco disqualifies you from reviewing high end cars.
Torrents definitely fund terrorism AND pedophiles.
While mix-tapes merely kill kittens
I don't remember the exact argument but I think buying only the TV programmes you want to watch supports terrorism
Leaving aside the rights/wrongs and the Apple specifics, but can they leave it overseas for ever?
Firstly they can use the offshore money to build factories, buy raw materials, buy competitors - but this is pointless since they wouldn't pay tax on those anyway.
But they could use them to buy other companies/investments and become essentially a hedge fund.
There would be no US tax to pay if Apple Bermuda bought shares on the US stock market, or bought Heathrow, or the port of Grimsby in the same way that the Dubai National Investment corp, or the Govt of Singapore did. then Apple's share price would rise, since it owned $Tn of profitable investments, and the shareholders would be happy.
Ultimately it could stop bothering to make shiny things at all.
> But the ones they make in the US they don't stick in foreign. They cough up the tax just like good little boys.
Then they are idiots who are going to get hit with a minority shareholder lawsuit.
As an Apple shareholder I demand that they stop wasting my money by giving it to Washington and instead sell the rights to the Apple logo to Apple Bermuda for $1 and then have Apple Bermuda charge them $500/item licensing fee.
Apple takes US consumer's money and sends a small fraction of it to China to make the thing, an even smaller fraction to Cambridge for an ARM license and sticks the rest of it in Apple's offshore tax haven.
Surely it's only contribution to US GDP is wages paid to those low enough on the totem pole not to have their won "tax efficient" compensation plan.
Slight mistake - don't know which bit of US government owned it. I'm just saying that the astronomers aren't cutting down redwoods and stamping on baby seals to build the telescope.
The limits on the number of telescopes, which included shutting down Keck-Interferometer since each little outrigger telescope "counted" - is purely negotiating by local interest groups for money. They protested the Japanese Subaru telescope until each Japanese engineer gained a local assistant to sit around and watch. The same groups who are perfectly happy to have massive tourist hotels.
Yes sure it's their sacred native land - in that case can we get all these Anglo-Saxon, Norse, Norman and other foreign invaders out of mine and return it to the Welsh?
There is no nature there. The summit is bare cinder at 14,500ft, there is no water, except in winter when it is under several m of snow, there is nothing to eat except a few bits of lichen.
The scientists wanted to close the summit above the 9000ft level to the public because tourists drive up there in hire cars and need rescuing when they get altitude sickness or sunstroke (you can get sunburn in minutes at that altitude), local idiots drive up there in 4x4 and cause a lot of damage and need rescuing when they get stuck.
But it's federal land so you can't restrict access. When I worked there all the land below 9000ft was a massive army training ground which made a great nature reserve, now I think it's mainly used for cattle which has destroyed most of the local wildlife.
>This particular volcano has not been active for 4000+ years.
To a God, 4000years = Meh
The presence of the telescope on top of an active volcano angers the local volcano god....
I don't think defacing the website is the worst that can happen
It even taxes people investing capital differently.
If you are poor and put money into a savings account, you pay income tax on the interest.
If you are rich and buy shares, you pay lower capital gains tax on the profit.
>The only people who benefit from increased productivity are the owners of the company's capital.
Which is us - almost all of every major company is owned by your savings, pension and insurance policies.
The real reason fro taxing capital less than income is that the people that propose it - such as economics columnists - are self employed and can pay themselves in dividends.
That's why it's an economic theory -> not even good on paper + impossible in practice.
Then you simply avoid being the final retailer.
Just like the contractor paying yourself in dividends. You simply buy that new TV/Computer/BMW for your side business and don't pay sales tax.
Since your side business is doing Nigel Farage impersonations for children's parties you don't get a lot of work, but you do get to claim a lot of expenses
Except for thermal IR, where you need to be a couple of million km at L2 or x-ray ground based telescopes are now better.
We are building 30m mirrors, compared to hubble's 2.3m or JWST 6.5m, adaptive optics can beat hubble's resolution and you can build new instruments every year. Building on the ground will always be much cheaper, so you get much more data for your money
>why not go the other direction and keep it going
For how long? Just boosting the orbit would need continuing amounts of fuel, eventually that will run out and you have to deorbit anyway.
Operating it means replacement components, generally gyros but batteries, data recorders and computers all die. It also involves a lot of expensive ground support to schedule time, upload missions, collect and store data and pay for people to work on the data.
It's a much nicer neighbourhood - Hubble has some huge limitations because of the need to put it somewhere that the Shuttle could get to.
for ( x : [parties] )
Party X claims that they will increase public spending, reduce taxes, make life easier for decent working people, fight terrorism, invest in Britain.....
>We've got 1.9m officially unemployed, 0.9m not in education, employment or training, and about >1.5m disability benefit claimants not in work
And the number of those with physics degrees and 10years software development experience is ...?
So a company in the city needing to expand it's trading system can either:
Take somebody unemployed and totally failed by the education system, educate them to post grad level and teach them software engineering and have staff ready in 10years - unless they leave.
Up the paycheck to persuade somebody to leave an identical job down the road. So if every company simply doubled salaries there would be no unemployment.
Not care about the skin colour or accent and hire from whereever in the world they can.
That's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it?
I give confidential security briefings.
He has been charged under section 2a of the Official Secrets Act.
Actually with 28nm -> 14nm you get 4x as many devices.
And if you have a single point flaw which destroys a single device on a wafer, you now have 4x as many devices per wafer so the cost/defect drops to 25%, you then get another few % win because with smaller devices you can get closer to the edges of a circular wafer so don't waste space.
But with more devices you waste more space to allow for the saw cuts between chips (kerf loss)
Moore's law wasn't that there would be exponential growth in computer chip power.
It was that the MOST COST EFFECTIVE feature size would decrease exponentially (or transistor count would increase exp)
So although a new smaller fab process would be more expensive to build and operate all the advantages, more chips/wafer, defects/chip, edge losses, kerff loses, all decrease with the square of the feature size.
With the new 14nm fab it isn't clear that it will ever be cheaper/chip than 22nm and it is even less certain for <10nm. There may be other advantages in power usage and fitting more features into a small phone - but that's not what Moore originally claimed
Boeing's definetly isn't isolated, the FAA statement says that they rely "on firewalls and other software devices". But is typical US/UK government fashion, you don't have them fix it - you just threaten anyone who points out the flaw.
In fact the NTSB are probably terrorists for pointing out why planes crashed - we should arrest them.
But then you would need a separate GPS receiver to feed the moving map display on the seat back. These things could cost $10 - it's much easier and cheaper to just have the map display connect to the aircrafts navigation system
They arrested a drunk guy for trying to open a door inflight - with about 5ton of air pressure on the door that is somewhat impossible.
So presumably if you stick pins in airfix models of a plane you can be charged with terrorist attempts to destroy it with voodoo.
You know they can be compromised - in which case pull their airworthiness certificate now and ground them all. Or they probably can't in which case why arrest the guy for suggesting they can?
Unless of course your intention was to stop people discussing the question - but the FBI would never engage in that sort of behaviour.
Lucky it was a Dell.
If it was an HP the bullets would have $99 each - although the gun would only have cost $39.99
I think this is the obvious solution. If the law is going to lapse in 2015 - you just turn the year back half a century or so.
A more detailed image shows the text "this space deliberately left blank"
Fortunately in America the government is completely immune to interference from corporate lobbyists and the aircraft/defense industry has no real power