She might be a troubled warbler...
But the photos clearly proved she's not a bearded tit.
In other news, it's nice to see there's truth in advertising these days. TwitPic - never was an application more accurately named.
1643 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Mar 2007
Strange. I did my monthly accounts yesterday morning (both company and personal), and everything was working fine. If it's gone a bit wrong, I'm glad I did it when I did!
And David, if you think HSBC are bad, you really haven't seen anything until you've seen Barclays in action. I can't fault the Barclays branch staff - they're always great. But their outsourced Indian helpline staff are the biggest bunch of incompetent, unhelpful, uncaring and just plain stupid wastes of oxygen that I've ever had the misfortune to deal with. I've nothing against Indian helpline staff - Microsoft have their helpline in India, and I've always found them to be helpful. But I do object to the losers which Barclays have hired on the cheap from the Bangalore Special School for the Disastrously Inept. I wouldn't even recycle them as Soylent Green, because they clearly don't contain sufficient nutrients for proper development of brain cells.
As is typical in this kind of thing, everyone focuses on how shiny the vehicle is. Trouble is, the propulsion system is the *easy* part - whether it's a Shuttle or Ares or Elon Musk's vapourware, it's all just variations on the theme of "sodding big rocket with sodding big fuel tank".
The *hard* part is keeping people alive for several months in the harshest environment around. And most of this simply hasn't been looked at. Radiation-wise, space is like sitting in the middle of Chernobyl's failed reactor for the multiple-months duration of the trip. ESS is within the Earth's magnetosphere so they don't have to worry about it, and trips to the Moon only leave the astronauts exposed for a few days so there's no permanent damage, but a Mars mission is on a very different scale. Not only are astronauts going to be exposed to this radiation for the duration of their trip there and back, but any permanent base on Mars is also going to have this problem (regardless of any hypothetical terraforming project) because Mars lacks a magnetic field.
And then there's the resupply problem. The ISS is utterly dependent on regular resupply for food and air. Bugger all work done on how to make a Mars mission self-sufficient for both of these, which is clearly going to be essential. OK, it's clear it's going to be hydroponics somehow, but what plants will provide oxygen best? and what plants will provide full nutrional needs for the astronauts (based on their requirements for zero-G, not on how their bodies work on Earth)? and how are the plants affected by zero-G? No-one knows yet.
Not to mention the problem of dealing with medical emergencies. A simple burst appendix is likely to be fatal on a mission with limited medical supplies.
Internally, each module knows what units it's using. A data dictionary lists variables and says what type they all are. And for external interfaces between modules, the interface spec says what units everything uses. If the units don't match up, you simply apply the appropriate scaling.
I've worked on Ford engine controller software. Their software has an amazing mix of units, many resulting from 20-year-old decisions which it's too late to do anything about because there's too much code using these variables now and it's too much hassle to change the old code. The result is multiplying/dividing by 1.609 (or whatever other scaling is needed) on the way in/out of your code. No big deal. It was rare to find the wrong units getting used, and if it did happen then testing or reviewing spotted it.
Sure, it'd be nice if units were consistent everywhere. It'd be nice if the Code Pixie came overnight and fixed it for you with a wave of her magic wand too. But back in the real world, stuff like this happens and you deal with it. If it fails, it was because they used substandard engineering and/or sub-standard specifications and/or sub-standard V&V (all of which tend to go hand-in-hand), not particularly because they used inconsistent units.
How often are they going to keep dredging up this old idea? The first time they put multiple Doctors in the same show, it was an interesting idea poorly executed, but now it's a shark-jumping, terminally dull, unimaginative cliche. The horse is dead - stop flogging it!
Plus if it's a Comic Relief or Children in Need special, track record says it'll be pants. Any time any show does a charity special, it's always rubbish. One day, I'd like to see someone do a charity pitch saying "unless you give us lots of money, we *will* show a clip of us debasing our integrity worse than the Star Wars Christmas episode", and we pay not to have them show us rubbish.
Anyone with even a passing interest in augmented-reality displays (and why they're not always a good idea) should read "Halting State" by Charles Stross. If you're interested in virtual worlds and you've not read "Snow Crash", people will rightly mock you. "Halting State" is equally essential reading for a view of what augmented-reality HUDs hooked up to mobile phones will do to the world.
Hell, never mind that. If you're even remotely interested in reading good fiction based on techy themes, you should be reading Charles Stross anyway, because he's one of the best futurist authors out there at the moment.
All those reports, I though it was simply impossible to get kids interested in science and engineering. Especially girls. That's why all those special awards for women involved in science and engineering had to be set up, because clearly the only way to get them involved is to have a "Britain's got female engineering talent" back-slapping contest.
Oh wait - actually, if they're interested in it, then they *will* do it. And be pretty damn good at it too.
Not only did they have errors come from the guidance computer on landing, but the meaning of those errors wasn't actually documented anywhere. So the guys running the mission made the "command decision" that if the errors came less often than twice a minute, they'd carry on.
To summarise: The hardware engineers were so pushed for time that prototype hardware ended up becoming the production version. The software engineers wrote code with major bugs in it, and failed to write any relevant documentation. The end customer found one of those bugs at the worst possible time for everyone. And the managers made a random decision with no basis in engineering knowledge.
So it's nothing at all like engineering today. Oh wait...
And FWIW Vincent, you might want to compare oranges with oranges. Say, compare a car ABS system with the Apollo guidance software. Embedded software has a massive raft of experience in making sure "Error 1201" doesn't happen on your car's ABS (or defibrillator, or other safety-related kit). Trouble is that it's expensive, and you get what you pay for.
Article does say tattooing.
And yeah, for 500k that sounds like a good deal. Leave 10k to one side for the removal operation when this company inevitably goes tits-up (sorry), and you're still way ahead of the game. And lest this sounds too much like whoring yourself out, remember that's her job description as an "adult movie star".
Dave, check out Neal Stephenson's novel "The Diamond Age" for ideas on that score. In the book, engineering has gone nano-scale, with devices that look like ultra-small versions of old-school Victorian engineering - all pushrods and valves and stuff like that.
Incidentally, there are several things that the article avoids mentioning, hence the other reason for the "fiction" in the title. Yeah, this thing can hold its state for umpty-tum zillion years, and that's great. But it takes about 3s for a bit to change state (according to their data), which seriously limits its usefulness for any purpose except offline backups. They also don't mention anything about how many times it can change state over its lifespan, which is a *very* important issue for a mechanical system. And nor have they checked anything about this thing's stability when it's in an environment with electric fields created by other devices, which is a bit like saying "this amazing ice cube will last for a trillion years without melting" and leaving out the disclaimer of "... if I keep it stored in a freezer for a trillion years".
Whilst the bloke in this case does seem to be a numpty, HBOS's reaction does seem to be typical.
About 10 years back, my sister had a student account with the Halifax Building Society (as it then was). Like all students, she got her interest-free overdraft. Great. And like a number of students, she exceeded this occasionally and was charged accordingly. Also OK.
But then she got a job after uni, and wanted to close her account. The conversation (over several months, multiple bank managers and various departments of Halifax) went something like:-
"I'd like to clear my student overdraft and close my student account, please."
"That'll be (overdraft+several hundred quid) please."
"Eh? Here's my latest statement saying how much my overdraft is, and here's the letters listing all the charges I owe you."
"No, pay us what we're asking."
"Where did the extra come from?"
"We don't know, and we're not going to tell you, so just pay us all this money or we'll blacklist your credit rating."
"OK, here's the money I know I owe you. Here's a letter saying I won't pay the rest until you tell me where those charges came from."
"Here's a credit rating blacklist. Have a nice life."
Had my sister been some future-free dosser, then maybe they wouldn't have wanted her as a future customer. But since she was a newly-trained corporate lawyer, and at the time was going out with a high-earning City trader, this is probably not the cleverest move for their future business. As far as our family is concerned, the Halifax can forget about ever seeing us as customers.
How unlike the BNP we know and, er, despise, to be lying and/or ill-informed. Surely that's never happened before? Oh wait, there was this thing called the Holocaust which they think didn't happen...
Oh, and for the benefit of the AC above - yes, I *do* register my displeasure with anyone I meet who says they're voting BNP. I make sure they're informed that the BNP are neo-Nazi scum (yes, those are the words I use). Been there, done that.
Minor notes from a stiffie pilot. (For non-pilots, hang-gliders and paragliders are often referred to as "stiffies" and "floppies" respectively, because a hang-glider is inherently rigid whatever happens, whereas a paraglider can - and will - deflate and turn into an expensive bag of washing if it doesn't like the wind/pilot/tone of voice.)
Foot-launched paramotors (paraglider plus motor) and powered hang-gliders in the UK are currently occupying a grey area where no training is legally required. But you'd be a bit of a twit to try flying one without proper training, and likely a dead twit too. That said though, Stu is right that they're the cheapest way to get airborne, both in terms of cost to buy and in terms of training to fly safely.
Downside is that they *must* be foot-launched. The moment you use wheels for take-off and landing, you're officially a microlight and all the rules for those now apply to you. You're also limited on weight and the amount of fuel you can carry.
And your airspeed isn't that great. For combat purposes, a powered paraglider is essentially a stationary target - and a large target at that. A powered hang-glider is faster and more manoeverable, so might be better at zooming into the dropzone at low altitude. That said, it's still not incredibly speedy unless there's a good following wind. Oh yes, and the ones powered by petrol engines are *seriously* noisy - there are a few people experimenting with electric ones, but everyone knows that current battery technology sucks, so you won't get very far with those.
The penguin, because even those could fly if you strapped a large enough engine to them...
My main problem with IR35 is that it's taxing people just because their contributions don't involve bricks and mortar. If you're a brickie with a ltd company, suppose you go out and build a wall for Barratt Homes. It's still using *your* skills as a trained and experienced workman, but because the result of your work is a physical thing, somehow IR35 doesn't apply to your skills. Or suppose you're running a shop on your own - again, IR35 isn't interested in you. But if you're a software engineer, suddenly you're a cheating scumbag because you're using your hard-earned skills the same way.
Now suppose I'm hiring out my skills successfully enough that I need to get a mate in to help. Suddenly I'm no longer caught by IR35, because we're both hiring out our skills instead of just one of us. Why's that?
And as Jeremy says, although contractors get more when they're working, there's a flipside that you're more likely to be out of work. How many permies spent 4 months from the start of the credit crunch without a job? Because I did, and as a contractor I wasn't bitching about it because I knew it could happen and I'd made preparations. I claimed nothing from DSS because I didn't see it was necessary.
As nice as it would be, the phenomenon of the "permanent contractor" is sadly a rare beast these days. What actually happens is that companies keep a small pool of contractors on regularly-renewed contracts during the good times, and this *looks* like the old "permanent contractor" thing. But in fact they're the cannon fodder for when work dries up, because unlike permies who need to go through the whole redundancy thing, if you lose a project and find you're overstaffed, you can just tell the contractors "don't come in on Monday" and that's it. Like I said, you make what you can in the good times because you know there *will* be bad times.
Oh, and hands up any permies who need to spend a grand a year on an accountant, £600 on company insurance (professional indemnity and company possessions like laptops), and need to spend a day a month of their free time doing invoices and stuff? Didn't think so.
People commenting about lighting cigarettes around batteries might care to remember the standard Haynes manual guidance about lead-acid batteries, specifically the part about hydrogen gas being given off when the battery is charging. You don't see too many accident reports due to mechanics smoking cigarettes around the car battery, most likely because (a) there isn't much gas released, (b) you'd need to actually drop the cigarette into the battery for it to have much of a chance of doing anything, and (c) it's clear to most people that smoking in an garage environment that contains petrol, oily rags and other flammable substances is not a move that ensures a long and happy career.
Another clue-free move from the majors. What do people really want for download? Answer: songs on all the CDs they can buy from Amazon, and all from the old CDs now delisted, available at decent bitrates (256 or above). And this at a price which reasonably reflects the costs involved.
Does iTunes do this? Nope. More than 20p a song, and I'm not doing it. Especially for older stuff like Quo, Deep Purple or Queen, I might as well buy a bargain-bin CD for £5 (or less) and get the physical version a whole lot cheaper, as well as with better sound quality (and rippable to whatever rate you want). And as the article says, the main users of Spotify are people looking up all their old favourites.
The majors have had 10 years since Napster to get a clue on digital distribution and actually *sell* us what they're sitting on and hoarding. All Spotify tells us is that after all this time, there still isn't anyone with any clout in the music industry who's figured it out - they're just lurching from one broken business model to another.
At this point I'd like to give a big shout out to Charlie Wartnaby, a former work colleague, who 10 years ago was playing around with a shoe-mounted 3-axis accelerometer to measure his running speed. Even at the time, this wasn't a new idea - Charlie found that someone already had a patent on it.
Oh, and re the article, the final few paragraphs seem a bit odd. Boot location sensors would certainly help the Americans not to kill any of their own soldiers or any of their allies' soldiers (a useful feature given their track record), but it's not much use for stopping the aforesaid Hellfire missile wiping out a houseful of sandal-wearing women and their barefoot kiddies.
You probably could if it was a Lhasa Apso. And a chihuahua barely makes a bun-ful. Not many people would complain either.
Come to that, as the owner of a pair of well-behaved cocker spaniels, I know of several poorly-trained dogs in our area which would be better off as barbecue than being left to run riot by their owners.
You have two rather depressing problems here.
Science is (or rather the scientists involved are) totally clear that global warming is happening, and pretty convinced that humans are the culprits. El Reg disagrees that it's even happening.
And as for how to respond, the answer is equally clear - we won't. Oh sure, individuals will do what they can, within the bounds of what they consider an acceptable lifestyle. But any solution will cost, and will cost globally. And it will have to be enforced. We can't even get the richest, most industrialised nations to enforce basic environmental issues in their own countries - things like not dumping toxic waste (cf. American underfunding of the EPA) or fishing out the oceans (cf. the EU fisheries policy, and French fishermen upset at even those limits). So the chances of a global policy being set up and enforced are basically nil.
And let's be honest, rich countries are going to be the last to feel the pain. They can always afford more concrete flood defences. It's not quite the same in Bangladesh, but then that's the point - no government really cares about people outside their country. Hell, even inside their country there's a limited amount of caring.
Stallman's ideology is all very well, so long as someone is bankrolling you. It's essential to remember that Stallman has never had to work in a "real" job with deadlines, customers and products to ship. He's gone directly from university ivory tower, to isolated lab ivory tower, to LUG-supported ivory tower. There's a reason that the GNU Hurd never appeared, which is that the ivory-tower types spent all their time playing around the edges and never actually produced anything that worked.
Oh, and to the people above who say that open-source software wouldn't exist without Stallman - wrong. Just wrong. Since forever, coders have written stuff for their own purposes, and shared it with others. Sure, the GPL wouldn't exist - but most (if not all) of the code released under the GPL would. It just wouldn't come with a pretty semi-legal license.txt file.
The picnic tables I've seen, the hole in the middle for the umbrella was really quite large, and most people of my acquaintance would be unlikely to, erm, touch the sides all round. So you'd need to be fairly accurate about what garden furniture you chose, to get the right dimensions. Which brings a serious level of danger to your trips to the garden centre, I would think...
Re Nokia's competitors self-destructing, this isn't necessarily a problem. If competitors can't tell posterior from humerus/extract digits from orifices, it isn't Nokia's fault. Motorola, for example - they coulda bin a contenda. But they pissed away their lead. They're just now trying to figure out what to do, and credit to them for that (even though the part of Moto I work for is being "downsized"), but letting themselves get in the situation of having 13 internally-competing software platforms in the first place (I kid you not!) is not exactly clever strategy.
Unlike the Microsoft/Netscape situation (and various similar situations with Microsoft), Nokia haven't actively undercut their competitors. Sure they're releasing this to the world, but their competitors already have equivalent software platforms so this isn't going to make a difference. What they don't have is (variously) software platforms which can be coded for easily, or apps for those platforms which are designed to be useable, or handsets which people actually want to buy. UIQ isn't going to change that, except that if competitors adopt it then some of the first two problems might go away or at least become easier.
There's nothing wrong with a monopoly, except when the monopoly uses its power to stop other people competing with it. But if your competitors are busy clubbing themselves in the nuts with their own baseball bats, you hardly need to deliver any more of a shoeing than they're already administering to themselves!
Someone's assuming that the owners of Rackable are only interested in leaving the table and cashing in their chips. If it's got a better solution than anyone else and it's continuing to make money, they might not actually want to, though.
Shock horror - people might be looking for a long-term investment and trying to compete, instead of selling out to J Random MegaCorporation?! They can't do that! It's... it's... un-American!!!
"surely one would just pick up the phone, inform the police"
Nope. If someone's committed a criminal act, you can get the police involved. But failure to pay a debt is a civil matter. That means you need to sue them (or in the UK, go through the small claims court) to get the money off them, and the court will decide how much you actually get. Only if they fail to pay that does it become a criminal act.
Hundreds of different varieties of food crops now? Sure there are. How many actually get grown? In each geographic area, a vanishingly small number which are best suited to that area's climate. So how would this be any different if the crops were GM?
The big lesson from the British GM trials a few years back was how little *anyone* (including the eco-brigade) knew about the ecology of farming areas. You want to support wildlife, you can forget about going organic - what crops you grow is vastly more influential than whether you use GM crops or go organic. That little story has been quietly sidelined by green groups though.
All the scare stories about breeding methods being against nature were busily trotted out when people first started selective breeding back in the 1700s. It was considered unnatural by a lot of people. Today, the same kneejerk group reckon it's perfectly natural, and GM is unnatural. As for the AC above recommending waiting 200 years, I assume that's 200 years while he and his family remain well-fed? While we're busy going organic in the West because we've got farming capacity to spare now, there's an awful lot of places that need every bit of artificial help they can get to feed themselves.
I'm not saying GM is universally good. I'm just saying that like all other scientific advances, if we don't try it then we'll never know if it works or not. The criminals who trashed study fields back weren't protecting the environment, they were simply protecting their ignorance.
As the saying goes, "Learn from other people's mistakes - there isn't enough time to make them all yourself."
And thinking outside the obvious immediate symptom is always a good plan. Over the last 10 years, I've spent a lot of time helping out electronics hobbyists on various forums. One of the most common questions is "how do I stop my circuit from resetting (or doing something else strange) when I turn on a motor (or relay, or other power device)?" Some people start into metal boxes to shield from EM interference and other weird-and-wonderful magic. But people who've been answering this question on a regular basis for years will tell you that actually the most common cause is that the power device is pulling down the power supply, so the circuit is resetting because it's got no juice to run on! They might have checked the supply with a voltmeter, but the supply dropout will typically only be for a few milliseconds so they'll never spot it with anything less than an oscilloscope.
Hence the point of questioning your assumptions. In this example, it's the circuit which exhibits the problem, and checks on upstream stuff seem to show them working OK. In fact the checks on the upstream stuff haven't been as comprehensive as they'd thought.
Fault-finding on cars can follow a similar pattern. The tendency is to replace parts in order of cost and/or difficulty-to-reach until you find the cause. The complication which people often forget is that the new part you just bought could also be knackered.
1) Don't buy from anyone whose other items include "1p recipes" or similar scams to artificially raise their ratings.
2) Don't buy from anyone whose address is a PO Box - no way to track them down if they do rip you off.
3) Don't buy anything where the auction time is set to 1 day (or less) - they're trying to get their stuff to artificially show up on top of the listings.
4) Unless you can establish that the seller is a genuine business specialising in what you're interested in buying, don't buy anything where the picture is a promo pic instead of a picture of the actual item taken by the seller.
5) When sending anything through the post, always use recorded delivery.
I've had two occasions where people have sent me crap - one pirate CD and one pair of fake mics. The first guy refunded me after I made a fuss. The second one, I managed a full house of the above screw-ups (including sending it back without recorded delivery, at which point he claimed never to have received it). I only lost £20 (£60 cost, £40 back from Royal Mail) so not too bad, but it was a lesson to me.
You don't have to avoid using eBay - there are plenty of legitimate buyers and sellers out there. You just need to use a whole lot of caution and not leave any loopholes.
Oh, I suppose I should add a sixth point: If there's a possibility of an item being fake, make sure you know how to tell the difference between the real thing and the fake.
Why are Google going low-power? The answer isn't to save the penguins. It's because for a company whose sole asset is the information it can provide from its servers, the cost of powering those servers is a major overhead. Save power, save money. And that's a competitive advantage over anyone else doing things with servers.
Yes, it'd be nice if that info was generally available. But who's it going to benefit? Their custom-tooled search-engine monster machines aren't very likely to be applicable to Joe Public who wants a reasonably-priced PC that can do a fair amount of stuff and play games. The only people who'd benefit are their competitors, which makes it pretty clear why they don't do it.
The single biggest power improvement available in a data centre is moving from AC power to DC power. Individual power supplies per machine are dreadfully inefficient, especially if it all goes through a UPS when it can have to be converted AC-to-DC-to-AC-to-DC with significant losses at each stage. And this has been a topic of conversation amongst server operators for 10-15 years, so it's not like it's news.
A more interesting idea would be to make active use of the heat from the servers. If you could dump the processor heat into the building's heating system, you'd get some significant improvements - not only from saving on heating bills, but also saving on air-con bills.
Would this make it a Dog-5 cable?
Oh, and @AC talking about "cat5 lead for sale. Dog not included", I was looking on eBay for a flight-case yesterday and found an ad saying "2U flightcase. Kitten not included." (Yes, the picture of the flightcase has caught the owner's kitten walking past just as they took the photo.)
Why no RotM heading for this? If anything deserves a RotM heading, it's a Ginger-gobbling rover-ravenous pup-plucking mutt-munching canine-chomping terrier-tasting pooch-partaking dog-devouring hound-hungry truck.
(PS. I would have carried on, but I ran out of words for "dog". Did I miss any?)
Ah of course. I was under the mistaken impression that most small private planes took off from small local airfields (usually grass fields with a small hangar at one end) where operating expenses are within reach of the average person, but now I remember that you can only take off and land at Heathrow or Gatwick.
Bottom line, if you're close enough to an airliner for it to matter, you're in airspace. At that point, either you've previously arranged with ATC that you're OK to be there, or you're in a world of hurt when you land because your plane's number is printed in big black letters along the fuselage and wings, and some big uniformed men without much sense of humour will be round your house in very short order. Airspace mostly only applies on the takeoff and landing paths for airports (and round the airport itself), and outside those it's assumed that everyone takes their chances and watches out for other aircraft. By that point your average airliner is indeed at 35,000 feet.
And that US license isn't exactly an "unprecedented low". Try hang-gliding. You can get powered harnesses for a hang-glider which basically turn them into an ultralight, and training is legally optional (although you'd have to be blindingly stupid not to get proper training, given that your body forms the control system, undercarriage and crumple zone, so if things go badly wrong it can hurt a lot). And even weightshift microlights need a whole lot less training than a PPL to fly a "proper" plane.
No real qualifications needed in most places to be a manager either. And that's what MPs effectively are - managers. A quick search on the web found that Richmond-on-Thames had well over £100m going through its hands each year. So, would your typical business with a turnover of £100m be paying its CEO more or less than £60k? I think it's a safe bet it'd be more, don't you?
I don't say they necessarily do a good job, but that's why we have the option of getting rid of the buggers if it turns out they've screwed it up. It's also why there's a minimum term, so that what looks like a short-term screw-up might actually be better long-term.
"So your website had to deal with a DDoS attack, boo fucking hoo."
Translation: "So your business lost $70k, big deal." Most small/medium businesses can't afford to lose $70k. And if the kid had spent 4 years continuous smashing up people's cars then he'd probably be spending more than 2 years in clink (now he's over 18 anyway). I think the judge probably got it about right, but you can understand the frustration of someone who's lost their pension or their kids' college education money as a result of 4 years of harassment and isn't going to be getting any financial recompense.
Yeah, kids sometimes do stupid stuff for the hell of it. But if you get to 21 and you're still doing it, chances are pretty good you're not going to grow out of it on your own.
It's worth remembering that the Inmos Transputer didn't fail because it was technically bad or out-of-touch with industry requirements. It failed because Inmos said "right, we've designed this - now let's sit back and watch the money roll in". Or perhaps more likely, they couldn't *afford* to follow up on the initial success - remember that this was a British company and British venture capitalists will *never* invest in engineering companies. So while AMD and Intel were busy cranking the MHz, Inmos sat there and watched the world pass it by.
Yeah, the Occam language was different - but it needed to be, if it was going to do parallelism effectively. Compare and contrast to the hoops you need to jump through for making threads/processes talk to each other.
Now that single-core is well and truly buried, I can see the Occam principles making a comeback. Probably not the language - that's too far gone. But I can certainly envisage a time when the C and C++ languages incorporate "par" and "wait_for" statements (for example) which allows the compiler and/or OS to figure out what should run on each processor, hiding all details of threading and inter-process comms from the coder.