4254 posts • joined 31 May 2010
Re: "whoever successfully builds a reliable, mass-producable qubit"
You're a funny, funny man.
Also, how the hell is a 5 man startup with $0.5M in angel funding going to take a mass producible qbit to market? That isn't going to run classical tasks. Or classical OSes. You'll need massive R&D just to get the right questions to ask. You'll need to develop a OEM partnerships, a channel, a developer community, a support network...and all of it while fighting off massive amounts of FUD from established players.
Christ man, companies today doing nothing more revolutionary that iterating a technology so that you can defer your purchase of a big shiny by another year or two (thus saving your company a few million) get buried under the power of the establishment. Do you honestly think that an HP or an IBM is going to let Bob's Bit Shack and Hot Dog Emporium come to market with a technology that could render them obsolete, or at least threaten to take away the high-margin portion of the market?
Really? You honestly believe that? I want whatever you're on.
If someone who is not a major comes out with a technology this revolutionary the only chance they have of bringing it to market is if one of the founders is an Elon Musk-class osmium-testicled billionaire willing to bet their entire fortune on a roll of the proverbial. And so far as I know, there's only one Elon Musk.
That means they'll sell. Even if they're a crazy high-end VC that normally rolls the hard six looking for a multi-instagram payout, they'll sell. They might take it to Nutanix size, but they'll ultimately sell.
Mark my words. Bookmark this comment. Throw it in my face if I'm wrong...but I promise you, I'm not.
Windows 8 was an unmitigated disaster...and not the only one. But Microsoft has a massive R&D department of incredibly smart people that does a truly fantastic job of coming up with great tech. Even practical tech.
Admittedly, a lot of what they do is take someone else's work and refine it (see: Kinect), but they do have a talent for finding ways to take otherwise PhD-level stuff and beating it into something the average prole can use.
...or they did. Today's Microsoft seems to think that PowerShell is the answer to everything, and we all are able to memorize entire tomes by rote. The company is a schism: one side focusing on the end user too much, to the point that they focus on their vision of what's 'easy' and to hell with everyone else. The other side focusing on pragmatic, practical technologies that the average user is never going to be able to use.
...but somewhere, deep inside that company...there are a great many people who damned good at taking any technology you could imagine and making it approachable. They just need to be given the reins.
Re: Needs better explanation
Uh...what? There's lots of quantum computing problems. Natural language comprehension is one. There's a lot of research going into the idea that mammalian neural processing employs a certain quantum component that allows us to solve "hard" problems faster than we should be able to, given the number of synapses, and our limited storage capacity.
A quantum computer isn't going to play Crysis...but it might well be an important part of a true AI. Another place it could come in handy is simulating human behavior. Quantum-assisted SimCity anyone?
Re: A quantum computer running Windows?
"MS are no doubt up to the challenge of bloating even a quantum computer to death"
Uh...what? Windows 7 consumed fewer resources than Vista. Windows 8 fewer than 7 and 8.1 fewer than 8. Say what you will about Microsoft, but they have done a damned fine job of delivering ever more functionality while requiring less and less horsepower to drive it. (Though they still have that "storage footprint" problem.)
I have no problems with homeschooling, so long as very stick guidelines are observed, and there's a damned good reason. The reason pretty much has to be "there isn't an adequate public school system available." In Canada, in a major city, that's a line of bullshit, and almost always trotted out by people who want to homeschool in order to indoctrinate their children.
Which brings me to the next item: homeschool should never include religious indoctrination. No child should be exposed to any religion until they are in secondary school. At which point, religious instruction should be mandatory: all major religions and beliefs should be covered, as well as where they have been (or not) disproven by science.
At that point, children should have a solid foundation of science, mathematics and critical thinking that allows them to make a rational, informed choice as to whether or not they want to believe in a given religion. No family should have a "right" to commit child abuse by forcibly indoctrinating their children before they are old enough to understand.
Where and when homeschooling is used as an excuse to isolate a child from science and increase their religious indoctrination children should be placed in custodial care and parents jailed ad aeternum.
I don't just dislike creationists, sirrah. I believe they are dangerous, and that teaching that shit to youth is child abuse.
Believe what you want, but don't teach lies to children and call it the truth.
Re: "Earth and its smallish satellite."
Pluto and Charon really should be considered a double dwarf planet with 3 minor satellites.
Re: Bad poll?
Well the rabid antelope comes in because I share John Oliver's opinion of internet commenters. He calls them "monsters", and they are. I don't claim to be any better, just honest. Quite frankly, I think the climate deniers are dangerous. They are not only distorting the truth, they are preventing us from engaging a very real threat.
The actions of deniers are driving up the very real cost of dealing with the tangible effects of climate change and virtually eliminating any chance we have to minimize the damage caused by acting proactively. To put it in terms they can understand "they fuckers are taking money out of my wallet by refusing to actually understand science all in the name of fear of someone taking from their wallet"!
Using science hasn't worked. Being polite hasn't worked. So far, not a single thing anyone has done has caused them to accept the truth of the world and we are collectively all the poorer for it. So yeah, it's them or us. In that context, I do entirely hope they all get eaten by rabid antelope before the damage done creates a planet unable to sustain a population of ten billion humans.
Even if you lop off the more fantastic potential long term effects of climate change, the picture is pretty bleak. Most especially the changing rainfall patterns (especially as so much of the human population is dependent on groundwater that has a miserable enough recharge rate as it is.)
It's time to be done with this ridiculous "teach the controversy" movement and get on with the business of coping with reality. There is no Santa Claus, your deity doesn't exist, and you have to be biologically incapable of understanding both maths and statistics to deny the reality of climate change.
Maybe it makes me a bad person that wish ill on others...I'm increasingly okay with that. There are bigger things to worry about than bent feelers or even entire individuals. Humanity is about to pass through the crucible; we'll have the best chance of it if we enter the journey with the maximum number of us capable of understanding basic science.
Besides, I think we've achieved a high enough species-wide fertility rate that we can jettison the sociopaths, don't you? Those who would sacrifice the future for a few cents off a tank of gasoline...
Re: Bad poll?
"doncha think?" No. Deniers don't. That's the problem.
No rational person debates the fact of climate change. If you feel inclined to debate either that climate change is occurring or that humans are playing a lead role, click that link, watch the video and then fuck the hell off...because you are objectively wrong.
The only rational question is "what do we do about climate change?" There are two possible answers: "fuck the future, I want mine and that's all that matters" or "let's all work together to leave the world a better place for those that follow than we found it."
Which you choose defines the kind of person you are. If you choose the former, then I hope you get eaten by a rabid antelope. If you choose the latter, hey, beer for you.
Re: Nutanix? Really?
Re: All very well but
Not while playing crysis...
You must die. My 15 / 2 demands a sacrifice.
Re: I want a high speed version of 10base2
Re: non story
"No, you got to play as a male w*nk fantasy instead."
I don't know about you, but a badass with a pair of .45s and a worse attitude isn't any wank fantasy of mine...
Re: Title change
1.21, not 1.32
According to my understanding, it is. There are lots of treaties that basically give the US carte blanche to ask for a foreign warrant for the data, wherein the foreign plod will see that warrant enacted and the data returned to the US. That's the proper way to do this, according to treaty.
This judge is saying "we don't need to do that, because MS is a US corporation. Our vague and general subpoena is enough to obtain data on foreign soil without involving that foreign government."
Not even Canada would agree to that...and right now, Harper is the POTUS's bitch.
Re: Power and rack-space savings of virtualizing network gear
In opposition: I just compressed 12 physical hosts (each of which was already running ESXi 4.0 and several VMs) into two new servers. The new servers use half the power per node of the old cluster. Bonus: network visualization means I got to pitch almost all the network gear (was 6 switches and 3 routers.) That site is now 2 switches + 1 router + two compute nodes and finito!
And VMs move from that site to others without fiddling with the network! Doesn't that just beat all?
It's all about how you use it...
"in your profession you probably don't have to stick 1000+ cocks in your mouth per year"
Obviously, you've never worked helpdesk.
Did you just say a sociologist is greater than a Corydoras Elegans? Because I, and my passle of cute catfish, heartily disagree.
Re: Thank you for your business.
100% correct. Which is why I don't believe in cloud storage for primary copies of data, or the use of cloud for mission critical apps.
It's a bit different if we're talking monitoring and/or config management, especially in the case of something like InTune where there is a locally installable alternative that the thing actually can work in tandem with.
Your company doesn't cease to do business tomorrow if your desktop management app provider turns into a pumpkin. It's extremely inconvenient, yes, but you are not absolutely screwed. (And the risk of this happening should be factored into the price, IMHO. Thus cloudy desktop management should always be notably cheaper than local.)
Your company does turn into a pumpkin if your financials app was under someone else's roof and they decide to pack it in. Or if the working copy of all your primary storage is there. That's where I remain a skeptic of the public cloud.
But each use case it it's own thing. If we haven't collectively learned that by now...
I don't think it depends on size, I think it depends on "company focus area." If your company manufactures biological weapons (or maintains samples of products that could be used for such) then expect them to watch you like a hawk, no matter how big you are. If your company deals in high-end infosec stuff, also expect that anything and everything you do is monitored by them at all times, full stop.
But I seriously doubt that my local construction company is being monitored, even though they are large enough that their top minds (and best builders) are brought in to do things like "create palm-shaped artificial islands in the middle east." They are absolutely a major economic competitor to US-based construction companies of all sizes, but the NSA's resources are finite, the magnifying glass of congress is upon them, and there's no "national security interest" that could be made up as rationale for economic espionage against the construction company.
Aerospace firm? Yeah, I get that. I really do; that tech could end up in drones, fighters, etc. High-end telecoms or silicon photonics? Again; this could be used to create guidance systems, etc. So there's a decent chance you have to worry about the NSA. Your local bakery probably does not...yet.
It'll be another decade before they have the AI to automate industrial espionage. Today, they can vacuum up all the data they want in an automated fashion, but you still need a human to review it and figure out what to do with it. The vast majority of what they slurp up is simply discarded. There's no place to store it (no, the Utah datacenter isn't remotely big enough), and they only have about 20K people working for them. How can they possibly review everything from every company/individual all at once?
They can spy on anyone they please in a heartbeat if they decide you're worth spying on. Make no mistake. They've automated that. But "who is worth spying on" still largely requires human decision-making. ECHELON (and descendants)' keyword detection is only going to pick up the most obvious targets. The rest requires honest-to-god legwork and actual spying to determine who is of value to target.
That means a good chunk of those 20K people aren't even sitting around making decisions about the data crossing the NSA's spy network. They're out trying to figure out who they should be spying on in the first place.
This will become less of an issue as time goes on. They'll be able to automate "who to spy on" and eventually "how to deliver relevant data to friendly American companies." A decade from now, the only barrier to getting the results of large-scale economic espionage will be "does your company/industry association have people in it that can be trusted with ultra-high-level security clearance so that they can be trusted to receive the data without Snowdening the fact that it is occurring."
Thus, to my mind, the large construction company that works on hyperscale international projects is safe today. 10 years from now? Not a chance. But the bakery probably still be.
Re: How big is the block of salt.
I have 2 nanotech firms and one pharmaceutical company in my stable alone that I promise you would be targets for economic espionage. It isn't the size of the company, it's what you're working on that matters.
That said, eventually, I expect that all companies of a certain size will be subject to economic espionage, regardless of area of endeavour. I just don't believe for a second that the NSA has the raw manpower to handle that today. There's a lot of automated decision-making that needs to get born first.
Re: So.. They are going to release IIS as a standalone app?
A) Prove "Besides, it's cheaper to license and has a lower TCO in most uses than say Red Hat or SUSE" is true.
B) Prove it's cheaper than using instances of RedHat for Dev/Test but CentOS for production
C) Prove it's cheaper than CentOS front to back.
Don't rush, I'll wait...
A huge chunk of those SharePoint licenses were SBS. Which Microsoft murdered. And now you get SharePoint for free with Office 365...not that many people use it.
Re: Yup, got this particular T-shirt
Nyet. Chrome comes up with a completely WTF location that has nothing at all to do with the tags. Not the point in the XML where the closing tags should be, not the beginning where the hyperlink tag starts. What chrome reports as a location is disconnected from reality and utterly baffling.
With this lot, neutrality doesn't matter. If you aren't fellating Microsoft you're absolutely against them. There is a pack of absolutely rabid anti-open-source types that occupy the comments, and I'm sorry if I inaccurately lumped you in with them. I think it's fairly easy to understand why I did.
Really, however, it's this comment that does it: But why go to so much trouble trying to pin this (in the reader's mind's eye) on MS - by the headline which strongly suggests the problem will lie with yet another DOCX issue and by "the most famous example" which is still pretty obscure to be honest - when what you are really up against is an OfficeLibre Write bug?
10 points for style but minus a couple of hundred for mendacity.
You outright accuse of my lying by somehow attempting to "pin this" on Microsoft. What the fuck? The article in no way attempts to "pin this" on Microsoft. There's absolutely nothing in that article at all that says "Microsoft Word is bad" or "LibreOffice is better". I mention - in the article and in the comments - that Word and LibreOffice can both give rise to errors where you might care about this kind of fix...and I go to some length to discuss the different ways it can occur, with examples using each product.
It doesn't really get much more neutral than that. Yes, the error I personally experienced was with LibreOffice writer, but that is completely irrelevant; the error class can be caused by multiple products, and thus mentioning that - with examples - is in the public good.
Yet you come out and accuse me of lying to people and somehow trying to "blame" Microsoft. So yeah, you know what? You get lumped in with the batshit-crazy Anonymous Coward and LDS as "rabidly and irrationally pro-Microsoft", to the point where I can't - and won't - take anything you have to say seriously. There's no neutrality or objectivity present in what you said there, there's a massive assumption followed by an attack.
The majority of people who read this article didn't walk away with a "Trevor was trying to blame this on Microsoft" vibe in any way shape or form. Some folks, however, see monsters where none exist. I've no time, patience, or respect for them.
I don't feel the need to "imply" Microsoft - or anyone else - is at fault for things. If I think Microsoft fucked up, I say so openly. If I think LibreOffice is better and you should buy that, then I say so. There's no pussyfooting around.
Comments like Are you saying that after all the fuss of "don't use crappy Microsoft, use our better alternative" responding to an article in which I did not in any way shape or form recommend one product over the other would seem to indicate that you fall into the "you didn't fellate Microsoft, you're obviously an evil, open source economy destroying wretch" camp.
So no, sir, I don't accept your "neutral tone" argument. You waltzed in here an accused me of lying. When I said "bullshit", you doubled down. Maybe you aren't rabidly pro-Microsoft, but your presentation was in no way a "neutral tone". If you come in guns blazing, don't get all shocked and shaken if'n I fire back.
Re: Simple solution I've always used
And your proposed solution is?
Re: Which Office product is at fault?
"Which looks to be fixed since Office 2010 SP1"
what does that have to do with anything? The fault existed. Similar ones have existed in the past. More will exist in the future. Microsoft doesn't get a free pass because they fixed a fault. They're just as much of a risk for this type of issue as anyone else. Besides, I know of at least three others in Excel that can cause a similar XLSX corruption that, to my knowledge, still affect 2013.
Re: Which Office product is at fault?
"It is correct to stop loading a document you can't process properly and you could corrupt more."
No it's correct to open it in read-only with only the option to save to a different file name...so you can get what you can from it.
Re: Which Office product is at fault?
It takes more training to move from Office 2003 to "fucking useless ribbon bar" than it does to LibreOffice.
No macros here, or on any of my client sites.
File --> Print --> PDF Printer.
Re: Yup, got this particular T-shirt
"There are two ways to cheat. "
Where is the word "just" in that sentence. What am I, the fucking oracle? I am supposed to know every possible means of "cheating" that exists? I did talk about trying to grok the XML manually, without making it pretty...but apparently that's inadequate?
Tried it. It's integrated into a plugin for Notepad++. It refused to try to pretty the XML because of the XML error, and simply told me what line it was on. :( Got another IDE you use Tidy in that I can try?
Re: Costs? (@Pen-y-gors)
Platinum group metals are rarely mined specifically for the platinum group metals. They are recovered as part of "tailings processing" for a more mundane - but far more profitable - metal. You don't mine for platinum. You mine for copper, and post-process the wastes to get your few extra bucks of profit per tonne by pulling out platinum group metals, gold and a few other odds and ends.
In fact, until we discovered a use for them, platinum group metals were often discarded when they were dug up from gold mines. A great example of this is the Barkerville gold rush in BC, Canada. Some slaves would collect platinum group nuggets because they were pretty, but often left them behind. Years later, when the old camps were reexamined, containers full of platinum were found, left behind as they weren't worth anything, even to the slaves...tens of millions at today's prices.
Re: Solaris clone
Yeah, but Oracle doesn't have to buy Red Hat in order to ruin it.
Feels a bit like a false flag op. You'd think a professional hacker would be better at social engineering bits.
That said, I would counter that same argument by stating that the
computer I use to post on Internet forums is not the one I use for work.
T,FTFY. 2001 says hi, it has some technology that can make this a lot easier for you.
Re: company directors owe fiduciary duties to deal with the company's assets in an honest way
"...therefore you would presumably consider it honest behaviour to steal everything and blow it all on Champagne and strippers, provided that you first announce that's what you're about to do?"
If you announce to the shareholders at the next AGM that you intend to take all of FY 2015's profits and blow them on champagne and strippers they are then properly informed and have the option to vote you out. If they do not, then taking all of FY 2015's profits and blowing them on champagne and strippers isn't "stealing" at all.
You laid out a business plan. It was voted on. You enacted it. There is no law that says your business plans have to make sense, only that they can't break the law.
I could not, for example, blow FY 2015's profits on champagne and hookers, unless I was in a jurisdiction where prostitution was legal and both the jurisdictions of my company HQ and my primary personal residence did not have laws against my engaging sexual services for hire while outside those jurisdictions. (Some places will send you to jail for being a john if they find you you engaged hookers in another country, etc.)
However, I could indeed blow those profits on champagne and strippers, because I can easily find a jurisdiction where strippers are legal, and I know of no jurisdiction that will prosecute you for engaging their services while in another jurisdiction.
Next item on the agenda: our marketing plan for FY 2015 is to invite all prospective clients to our champagne and strippers binges to experience first hand our next-generation community-building techniques. With this bold new plan we hope to be able to drive greater revenue by ensuring potential clients understand how an excess of champagne and strippers can create company loyalty.
This brings us to a voting item. The FY 2015 business plan is to spend all profits on champagne and strippers. All opposed: <crickets>. All in favour: "me!". Motion passes.
Re: UEM, LAYERING, ASSESSMENT, MONITORING, ACCELERATION should be included
There is going to be more than one Webinar. There has to be. The 1 hour basic infrastructure webinar turned into 1:45 minutes and we couldn't even get into user virutalisation, profiling, etc. This is a huge topic.
Re: What OS for Apollo
That doesn't make any sense! There's an anonymous coward here that assures us all on a regular basis that Windows dominates the server market and is installed on way more servers than Linux could dream of! Surely this would be reflected in the supercomputer racket with Microsoft's overwhelming presence?
Otherwise Anonymous Cowards on the internet might not be telling the truth about everything! Egads!
http://www.pcworld.com/article/239634/how_to_speed_up_windows_7_installs_with_slipstreaming_and_usb.html. Hope that helps you in the future.
"“every day a third of our population uses the Internet and of course, there has to be some regulation”, but that the government doesn't want to stifle a “5 trillion roubles” business."
"...we want to own it, and make sure that it can't threaten any of our other interests", he muttered under his breath.
"I can see little reason for someone to buy a Samsung over say a Moto G"
It doesn't matter if you can see the reason or not. People choose Samsung by an overwhelming margin. Samsung are a "name" now. The likes of HTC and Moto are not.
"Recently as well Apple's "new" yearly OSs feel more like service packs pushed out perhaps with a few new features but mostly to obsolete older hardware."
It's a yearly OS bump. What do you expect? XP --> Windows 7 every 12 months? Get a grip, man!
This is incremental development. It's somewhere between Facebook's "push out three new versions a day" and "take 5 years to get to the next version" of more traditional development. They are midlevel releases on a yearly basis. Mostly bug fixes, evolutionary improvements, and every few years a major feature (like Siri) will be released.
As to "outdated hardware"...why do you care about hardware? Smartphones today are where PCs were in 2006: "good enough". The year-on-year incremental change in hardware is utterly fucking irrelevant. If you're 2 cores instead of 4, who cares? 4 instead of 8? Oh well! Slightly lower clock? Well, darn! It doesn't matter.
What matters is fitness for purpose...and the iTat does the job, just like WinPho, 'Droid and BBerry.
Achievement unlocked: smartphone mediocrity. We've reached the point where if you want "wow" it's time to invent a new market.
"give someone a fish (knowledge to change a tyre), and they eat for a day, teach them how to fish (logical thought, problem analysis), and they eat every day."
Teach someone to change a tire and they might think they know how, then try to do it when/where dangerous and get themselves killed...or at the very least make non-optimal use of their time. Teach someone about tires, flats, recognizing what needs be done and then telling them about the options for resolution to the situation and they can make rational judgements about pursuing learning to solve the problem on their own or always relying on an expert.
Teaching someone programming does not teach them logical thought or problem analysis. As much as many developers with it did, I know a hell of a lot of colour-by-numbers devs and devs who couldn't think logically if their lives depended on it.
I agree 100% that critical thinking needs to be taught in school. Just look at the number of people coming out of school who still believe in an interventionist deity! But teaching people how to program isn't going to teach them critical thinking. You have chicken and egg all mixed up here.
Critical thinking (and probably formal logic) needs to be a core course all on it's own. In Canada, at least at the schools I attended, Social Studies was that course. It taught us critical thinking and analysis, using history as the lesson guide. We also did learn formal logic there, boolean algebra and so forth. That is something I agree every child should learn.
But teaching them programming won't teach them sweet fuck all unless they have the critical thinking bit down pat first. If you want more colour-by-numbers devs then fine, give the poxy larva enough knowledge to be dangerous, but don't come bitching to me when you hand the keys to the kingdom over to a passle of brats that earnestly believe that the Earth is 6000 years old.
I just hope I'm not alive to see that world...
Re: @AC101 and in general
"In Canada and in large communities vehicle support may work as you describe. Where I live and much of the world, not knowing basic car fixing can kill you. "
Agree 100%. But that's my point entirely: there is no one universal knowledge set that every human being should have. It all depends on where you live, what you plan to do with your life, etc. And if you plan to go somewhere new - on vacation or to live permanently - you will probably need to learn new things to survive there.
Isn't that what our species does? Adapt? What's with this idea that we need to teach our kids an impossible amount of knowledge in their early years? And why the idea that they need to learn exactly what we like, instead of discovering who they are and who they want to become?
I love that you think it's "tinfoil hatting" to look at history go "wow, when given that kind of power over people's lives, in every single instance it was abused, abused quickly and abused horribly" and then turn to something like "giving carriers censorship-via-degredation power" and think "I believe this power will be badly abused."
You actively encourage people not to learn from the past. You're like anti-history. Subsume oneself into joy-joy happy thoughts based on [???] and just presume it'll all work out. It's as absolutely unreal as people who honestly believe that in economic terms humans are rational actors. Dangerously untrue, but something we all desperately want to believe, so those who feed the lie obtain enough power to cause damage.
I'm deeply sorry that my actually giving a bent fuck about "the little people" offends, but I am not burdened by some bizzare sense of morality that says one group "deserves" to have power over another. I'm a pragmatist. What matters is that we can find a balance of power and freedom that means we can all live together in the closest semblance of harmony possible until we hand the world off to the next generation for them to have a go at running the thing.
Based on both history and the rather unholy amount of science that I read, I am absolutely convinced that many [most] of the ideas about social organization you espouse are, in fact, in direct opposition to finding a balance between power and freedom that allows for societal harmony.
You and I are never going to see eye to eye on this, Andrew. Our fundamental beliefs are simply too different.
"You're still justifying "making stuff up" to get a policy through?"
No, I was mocking people by lampooning their arguments in a humorous fashion. They do have humour where you're from...right? I realise "people" might be a stretch to find there...but please tell me your species evolved humour...
Re: They fail to "read-only" mode.
Consumer SSDs don't fail to read-only mode. Enterprise ones generally do. Micron Enterprise ones absolutely do.
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're making ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Analysis Nadella: Apps must run on ALL WINDOWS – PCs, slabs and mobes
- Apple: We'll unleash OS X Yosemite beta on the MASSES July 24
- Yorkshire cops fail to grasp principle behind BT Fon Wi-Fi network