Re: Those tax cuts in action
Good heavens no! Workers and wage increases? Are you MAD?
768 posts • joined 4 Dec 2014
Actually no. $99 doesn't mean you *have to* use the Mac App Store or the iOS Store to deploy apps. With an Apple Developer ID, you can create your own DMGs and distribute things outside the Mac App Store. It's just that when you install the app, you install an app that is *signed* and guarantee that it's ok (because it's been checked).
We deploy scientific software that requires some components that are unsigned because signing will not allow the actual app to communicate with some non-macOS components. But we were aware of this problem already and are looking at implementing XPC 'stuff' to replace Dbus-based inter-process comms.
It just becomes more painful and annoying, and possibly us going 'this is not worth it'...
Airbus doesn't necessarily mean safer, correct. Airbus didn't make the mistake of using just *two* sensors for critical control systems. They *did* however make the mistake of not using heated sensors (which was rectified post-AF447 when it became clear that that was one contributing factor).
Well, Boeing persuaded the FAA that because it was a derivative, it was ok to be certificated as such, nevermind the fact the wing is new, the engines are new, the CoG is different and now requires software to maintain the AoA. But hey... it's all *fiiiiiiiiiine*.
Other airlines recommend full automation all the time. This can have problems e.g. Asiana Flight 214 which came in too low at Los Angeles and struck the perimeter wall.
San Francisco. It struck a sea wall which is rather more solid than a mere perimeter wall. That was also the first fatal hull loss of... a BOEING 777. Not an Airbus. A Boeing. And it was not particularly the automation at fault (given this was a visual approach), but also Boeing's unnecessarily convoluted documentation for its flight automation system... THAT is what was criticised. It led to the lack of systems understanding by the pilots (which was a contributing factor).
Anyone pointing fingers at Airbus over automation and gleefully saying that Boeing doesn't have that problem should look at exactly this incident and Lion Air JT610. :-(
Sully flew an Airbus (US1549). Which is, if you were to believe some in this thread, "fully automatic and the pilot can't do *anything*". The fact that Captain Sullenberger was able to put the A320 down on the Hudson well enough to not only keep the hull intact, but have everyone onboard survive the incident (albeit with injuries), should be enough proof that the whole "Airbus is crap because automation" narrative is crap.
Incidentally, the Atlas (Prime Air) 767 freighter that went down in Texas recently did so after turbulence and 'stick input'... it appears it pitched up (in turbulence) and the pilot then pushed the control column forward to bring the nose down. It then stayed down until it impacted. The stick shaker that *should* activate in that instance apparently didn't. So... Boeing with its "the pilot is always in control" policy clearly is not infallible either (and the 767 has a shedload less automation than the 787 or the new MAX has).
Airbus are pretty much completely reliant on technology, and it is openly acknowledged in their design philosophies etc. The pilot cannot bypass the technology, that capability no longer exists, and that has to be explicitly part of the design->deployment process.
That is categorically not true. Airbus uses standard flight law, alternate flight law and then only in extreme situations will allow the pilot to make *all* decisions.
QF32's return to Singapore after the engine explosion was literally the latter... One thing that came out of the QF32 debriefs was that the flight computer was not helping with the number of error messages it was showing, and that was apparently changed.
The difference between the 737 MAX certification and Airbus' approach is that Boeing convinced the FAA that the fact they needed MCAS to help deal with the change in the CoG and aircraft stability was not something pilots needed to know. Brazil disagreed and insisted that any airlines using the MAX in Brazil would have to specifically train their pilots to be aware of MCAS and how to control/disable it if it failed/misbehaved. EASA was leaning towards Brazil's view but that also changed (no doubt helped by plenty of chivvying from Boeing).
Airbus is at least very clear about what it does, how it does it, and why it does it. Boeing changed how they did things and showed a lot of arrogance by saying "oh the pilots don't need to know and it won't make much difference in the grand scheme of things". Tell the relatives of JT610 that.
@Waseem, I totally get what you're saying (being from Africa, seeing Ethiopian having this happen hurts, especially given they have a stellar reputation compared to many of their continental aviation compatriots).
The UN is special though and having multiple employees killed in a flight (similar to MH 17), can probably invoke additional protocols beyond just a standard accident investigation (usually handled by the country of the airline, the country of the manufacturer and certification authority, and possibly nations of passengers involved in the tragedy). I would not be surprised if they involved the French authorities as well. The global media tends to also sit up when an incident involves Europeans, Americans, or Asians.
The US of A is happily riding the electronic vote wagon... Diebold? Yeah, we believe them. No problem. They say it's not hackable. Ok then. Please go ahead and vote.
The Swiss at least expose their dirty laundry (*gasp* so un-Swiss) by making their code publicly available and asking people to see if there are problems with it. Problems are found, fixed, and checked again... better than Diebold's "Nothing to see here, everything's fine" hand-wave.
I'd rather trust an e-voting system designed by the Swiss than anyone else. The Confoederatio Helvetica would *never* allow anything to affect what makes Switzerland Switzerland negatively.
Well... Mostly. They have their moments in some instances (like their referendum on restriction of movement... which backfired spectacularly).
Given that this kind of data breach is the same as perpetrated by a 'disgruntled employee', any *smart* person would download such information before their termination. Of course, under GDPR the act of their termination (whether self-performed or not) would cease their permission to use that information...
Somehow that data would probably be considered grandfathered under some obscure loophole of some sort... Of course, supplementing/updating such data with data gleaned post Data Protection Act legislation would probably make it subject to the Act and hence subject to data retention rules. Another reason to BREXIT! EMPAAAAAHHHHHRRRR! Taking back controoooooool!
*eyeroll* *slaps own hand for typing that*
Welcome to my life in science. Science is teeming with people with one or more PhDs, M.Scs etc... yet basic comprehension of error messages (or, if you don't understand it, leave it on the screen or take a screenshot of it), is beyond them! And then, when you ask them about it, they launch into a long diatribe how it inconvenienced them.
That said, the UX (user experience) of some software packages I've dealt with in my time in IT is horrific!
If a professional DNA lab does an analysis and finds them to have identical DNA (as one should as an identical twin) but 23andme et al show wildly varying results, I would trust the professionals, thank you very much.
For any avoidance of doubt, an organisation like Sanger I would trust (given that they worked hard over many years to sequence the entire human genome with exceptional accuracy)... anyone who claims to give you accurate results in days from a (dodgy at best) spit sample is lying through their teeth.
Actually, I did this once... for 3 months.
When Rootmetrics first showed their face on this glorious isle of ours, I was annoyed by the mobile coverage maps that our mobile operators here spaff out. Some of their maps are just sheer fantasy (like Vodafone claiming that we had 3G coverage when we just about got GPRS). Their (Rootmetrics) Vodafone coverage in their map around our neck of the woods wasn't that good. So, as it happened, Vodafone had given me a new contract with unlimited* data for 3 months. So I took ruthless advantage with the new fancy phone (an iPhone 4), and ran RM's app constantly in loop mode on my journeys to and from work, into Oxford, around the back country, wherever my fancy took me, the phone and the network were being hammered. After 3 months, Vodafone said that my data usage was above average, would I like to upgrade the data portion of my plan? No, given that in those 3 months, the RM map around our neck of the woods started looking a damn sight better and my purpose was done.
And yes, when EE crowed how RM said their network was best, they were *not* lying. Vodafone was *crap*, no wonder they cried foul. But given that my own data collection showed that Vodafone *was* in fact crap, I applauded EE. I'm still with Vodafone though... mostly because tech support (should I need it) is actually around after 8pm (unlike EE), and because some of my plan bennies are worth it.
@Spartacus, the digital services tax is not on profit. It's on revenue. See this?
The EU's proposed tax is a 3 per cent levy on firms with a global annual turnover of €750m and annual EU revenue of at least €50m. This would hit around 200 companies and boost member states' coffers by about €5bn.
The bold is mine. So yes, Soundcloud and Spotify would most certainly fall into this. If the US goes for a tit-for-tat response (which, given the current administration, they are likely to do), both Swedish digital giants would see a fat slice of their profits go to Washington, D.C.
the problem here is that a small number of largely American companies are exploiting technicalities to transfer profits. Punish those fuckers, not those who already pay their fair share.
Please. Who are you kidding? *Every* company employs a number of accountants who, whenever something in the tax law changes, look at how it can improve the company profit margin and minimise tax exposure. It's *not* just 'largely American' companies who do this. Every company does it.
And if the law permits it, it is not 'exploiting a technicality'. It is called 'doing what the law says you must do'. That HMRC (or whichever tax authority) eventually cottons on and goes 'hang on, that's not what we meant', that's not the companies that are at fault, but shoddy law-making.
The Double Irish Dutch Sandwich mechanism only exists because the Dutch tax authorities let it. Why do they let it? Because a little bit (the Dutch 'foundations' that usually make up part of the DIDS are still taxed in the Netherlands but at a virtually nil rate because their 'revenue' is all royalty) of a large pie (the said DIDSes) is still better than *no* slice, or worse, *no* pie at all. The Dutch government knows full well that this mechanism is being subverted to funnel profits away, but that arrangement suits them, until it doesn't, that is.
Ireland has already done its bit and has eliminated the quirk in their law books that allowed the Double Irish (portion of the DIDS) to exist. By 2020, all companies using the Double Irish have to have eliminated them because then it is no longer a legal mechanism that has any tax advantages.
... If at least one US legislator has already cottoned on, expect others to too. And yes, this is *exactly* what I referred to 2 months ago (go and cruise through my previous responses, it's in response to member 'Arthur the Cat'). What goes for the goose goes for the gander. Ireland knows which side its bread is buttered on, and Sweden (especially them) and Denmark and others are also getting a glimmer of what this may mean to their own digital giants. Spotify and Soundcloud are both Swedish and are exceptionally popular; so you can see where this could go if/when the US retaliates against the EU's digital services tax.
... It was a big fat money sink, yes. But like a few others here, the effects on STEM subject participation is not to be underestimated. This has been seen time and again; Apollo and Saturn V, Thrust SSC and others have had a distinct (but delayed, obviously) effect on STEM. I really hope this administration does not stop that wave from happening. :-/
@El kabong, please. If scientists the world over are impressed, they tend to be impressed for a reason. The LHC is the most powerful particle accelerator on the planet (although it accelerates protons, not electrons), and it works by *smashing* things together. The 14 TeV are actually 2 x 7 TeV in opposite/oblique directions.
The most powerful electron accelerator on the planet currently *only* does 17.5 GeV (in one direction), and it only emits a monochromatic X-ray class beam of radiation of 25 keV. To emit a beam that has energies of 25 TeV or more... add energies inside the quasar by another order or three (or four... you get the drift) of magnitude.
Find me a man-made toy that emits a radiation beam of 25 TeV before speaking again about 14 mosquitos vs 25 mosquitos.
The only thing that matters to me is 2).
If you can't make a watch that runs for more than 24 hours, then we're not friends. Garmin beats this with my trusty old vivoActive (7 days with 6 days of at least 2 hours/day active training with chest strap)... just over a week's worth of juice (8 days at a stretch).
The Apple Watch 2 I was given never made it out of its box... it still sits there, 2 years later. *SHRUG*
Ahhh, ISDN. I still have my old Digi DataFire ISDN card that I used to use to dial into the US with for 64K uncontended connectivity directly into our HQ's services, instead of the crawling 33.6K (you try running Lotus Notes over PPTP on 33.6K and 16K international data throttling and tell me it's not anything but crawling) I had for standard Internet before that. The 56.6K Sportster went back into its box until I moved countries.
The phone bill dropped by almost 2/3 when that DataFire arrived and I kicked it into action...
Yes... @Chris King is right... I know this is true because a class colleague of mine ended up at a fancy uni studying for a B.A. Informatics degree, whereas I was at the equivalent of a polytechnic and got a diploma for the exact same thing. Where they studied on all the theory of everything that is business administration, we got dumped in the deep end with our first COBOL classes within two weeks of arriving there and not even knowing where to switch the workstation (an ancient, even for that time, Olivetti one) on.
To add more fun, some machines had the old 5.25" 360K drives, whereas others had the more modern 5.25" 1.2MB ones, and... even more fun, the third-year lab had... *GASP* 386es with both 5.25" *AND* 3.5" 1.44MB drives! That lab was always busy... with DOOM players.
It was bizarre to have my class colleague begging me to teach her COBOL at the end of her second year, where I was already having loads of fun with things like ADABAS/NATURAL, Pascal and C (COBOL? Who dat?). Her course was 4 times the price of mine, yet here I was teaching *her* stuff that her lecturers didn't bother to teach them!
Yeah. Now she's a house wife (nowt wrong with that, but a bit of a waste of 3 years at uni). I'm messing about in science, aviation and IT. Funny how that works.
YEAH POLY! POLY FOREVER. :-D
P.S. And yeah, I am of the vintage where dodgy hardware things are all too familiar... and this story is not unplausible at all.
No, Sanders is not for "just doling out other people's money". What Sanders is for is a fair wage without necessarily having to rely on the government to keep your head above water because your shyster of a boss is paying you just about enough to get away from any legislation that could cost him more in fines & reputation. Where he *will* "dole out other people's money" is when people do end up needing assistance from the government (like losing your job, needing healthcare) or for something that universally leaves society better off (like free education). It doesn't mean irresponsibility.
Paying employees a decent wage so they don't need to rely on government handouts makes perfect sense. They will pay their taxes, they will be net contributors to society and the economy, and the government can spend what they save on their handouts on better things (education, not the slush fund that's called the DoD). ;-)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019