Re: Did they fix the memory problem?
Hmm....I have more tabs open and only hit around 600MB. Check what your tabs are doing. If they're large or media-heavy, they'll hammer ANY browser, unless you can prove otherwise.
16605 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Home router issues don't go away with IPv6. That's why uPnP exists for better or worse because the computer illiterate want to use their stuff, the Internet is not built around hand-holding, and the security/ease-of-use dichotomy prevents a happy medium. You simply can't fix Stupid, but Stupid outvotes you, so you can't tell them to stay off the Internet.
"Compare with: Orlando - 49 dead. Sutherland Springs - 27 dead. Las Vegas - 59. And that's just in the last 2 years."
How about Bath Township? 40 dead, guns not directly involved. Oklahoma City, ~150 dead, no guns involved at all, 9/11 ~3000 dead no guns involved. Plus I'm pretty sure the British can still remember The Troubles which had plenty of non-gun fatalities.
It's scarily easily to cause mayhem without a gun, and if you're someone like a farmer, everything you need can be obtained legally and below suspicion.
"If the issue of voter apathy is on the table, then First Past The Post also needs to be critiqued. What is the point of voting for what you believe, if it is not a majority view, if your vote will always become irrelevant. One could most legitimately put the blame on voters if no votes were wasted."
Votes are going to be wasted no matter what, and people will complain about that waste. It's a simple matter of so many candidates and so few positions. SOMEONE has to lose as a result. Because of this, there are, were, and always will be pros and cons for any voting system you can think of.
"An analogy would be a river - when it's a small stream a big rock heaved into it makes a huge difference in it's direction of flow, as a large river, that same rock is virtually irrelevant, there might be a splash, but pretty soon it's sunk to the bottom and no longer has any effect on the river."
But then there are cascade effects. Your little stone may not do much at first, but it may actually disturb the flow just enough that it causes the banks to erode and cause a mudslide that results in a major alteration to the flow. Next thing you know, the river's stopped flowing to your village. Worst part it, because the catalyst was so insignificant, you can't really know that it was that little stone that set it off.
You trust a system that makes no attempt whatsoever to verify that the people that are campaigning for votes are who they say they are OR will do what they say they will do.
IOW, practically all of civilization relies on a degree of trust that cannot be guaranteed for even the short term. Humans simply don't work that way.
"For some reason, this data isn't routinely collected, but if we want to make an informed decision we need it. In aviation, it is suggested that the number of incidents (near misses) is about 10 times higher than the number of accidents."
WHERE is this suggested, because firsthand experience tells me it's the opposite?
"Motorway Lane assist systems are another form of semi-autonomous car control system; they reduce the number of "dozy driver wandering about motorway" sort of accidents. This is the sort of thing the researchers were arguing for; not fully autonomous vehicles but systems which reduce the number of just plain stupid things a motorist can do through inattention or misapprehension."
But some would argue that this may just result in stupider drivers that in turn create edge cases that the semi-autonomous systems aren't capable of coping. Plus there's always Trolley Problems.
They tried again in the 90's...until they accidentally created a sinkhole in downtown LA. These days, sprawl is the main reason it's not considered viable since LA built OUT while New York (out of necessity) built UP.
"But in concentrated/built-up areas vehicles are usually travelling fairly slowly, so there will be accidents but should be relatively few fatalities (except for those evil unAmerican lefties who dare to walk)"
You've never been to New York City or Los Angeles, have you. Built-up AND high-speed travel aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
"BTW the US has roughly 5x the population of the UK and 10x the road body count, despite having no roundabouts and significantly lower average population density."
But it has a higher NUMBER of concentrated areas, and that's where the accidents pile up. There are also more total road mileage in the US, particularly in freeways/motorways where speeds are higher and flow is expected to be smoother. You think London is bad? Try Los Angeles.
"People who want customers generally. You seem upset at the idea the gov doesnt need to dictate everything. Would you prefer the gov to dictate protocols for a technology it doesnt understand? Or exact penalty on those who cause harm? Dictating a protocol can cause law breakers (such as the recent engine pollution scandal) because the demand is stupid/unreasonable. Punishing those who cause harm reduces the desire to do so and whatever methods work can be employed."
But by then it's too late and people are dead, people get mad, and usually people VOTE. So governments are incentivized to keep the body counts down. Plus it may be too late to punish those who cause harm because (a) they're dead, too, or (b) they saw what was coming and went whack-a-mole.
Ghost drivers are usually of a suicidal bent in any event, meaning you'd be helping them with their death wishes.
Going back to the topic at hand, perhaps the best way to challenge the system is to make it a game of Tom, Dick, and Harry: only instead of one truth, one lie, and one flipping, all three are flipping and you need to be able to tell which are which first-time every-time in a split second (or you miss the window and crash). It basically boils down to there being no way to truly trust the data. Any attempt to attribute trust can be trivially faked. Indeed, the whole problem of avoiding accidents may boil down to You Can't Fix Stupid, because the ONLY source that COULD potentially provide enough trustworthiness...is Big Brother. Nothing else has enough scope. So what's your choice? Big Brother watching the streets or stupid drivers taking innocent drivers with them?
"Not to mention, even if this went into law tomorrow we're talking about the US where they haven't even made seatbelts mandatory in older cars."
THAT'S due to a Constitutional issue known as "Grandfathering." Because of Article I, Section 9's prohibition of retroactive (ex post facto or "after the fact") laws, it's very tricky to force old things to take on new things. I see it in a local bar that got an on-premise alcohol license BEFORE "curfew" hours were incorporated into the licenses. Because they're in good standing and because they keep renewing the license ahead of time, there's no way to enforce the curfew in that bar (because any attempt would run afoul of the retroactive law prohibition), allowing them the draw of being able to serve all night. It's also why military weapons bought before 1985 can legally be owned and traded (because the law that prohibited their ownership and sale only went into effect in 1985).
You forget. You first have to get the cipher to the other side first. First Contact Problem. And the Russians are infamous for their intelligence network, remember? Unless you can demonstrate a zero-knowledge cipher.
Plus, if the Russians control most of the lines in there, don't you think they'd be able to do some kind of on-the-fly sanitation and mangling to throw things off, just on general principles? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander (meaning, what if the Russians are doing the same thing as a COUNTER-intelligence ploy). If the Chinese could do it, why not the Russians? At the very least, they could slow clandestine communications to a crawl.
Makes me think it may be time to take a page from the old school when software was stored a little more permanently. Not in ROM exactly like old computer or the old Macintosh Toolbox. But with a move toward compact solid-state storage, perhaps it would be a good move to start designing motherboards with a primary position to store a modestly-sized (say 64-128GB) SSD where the ONLY thing on it would be the basic OS. And it could have a physical provision where the write pin can ONLY be engaged by way of a switch (keyed or not, up to you) so that there is at least the OS cannot be overwritten except at someone's physical intervention. Everything else is fair game, and OS-fungible stuff can still go there, but dedicate a space (that can be physically write-protected) for the base OS. Heck, with 64-bit addressing, a lot of that OS can be memory-mapped as well. Another throwback.
I will agree on the print statements or some equivalent like putting the results in a status or debug window. Anytime I'm now quite sure about how something will turn out, I will go straight to debug outputs, pauses, and even the occasional early termination to make sure I iron everything out.
"They are taught to write elegant, readable and maintainable code... A processor doesn't care about how elegant the code is to read, it only cares about how it is executed."
But then, the NEXT person to maintain the code may not be them, which is why the emphasis on readable code. Kind of a Golden Rule thing. The next time you enter a coding project in media res, you would prefer being able to pick up on the details quickly.
Incidentally, that doesn't mean you're not able to write relatively tight code, but it would help out a lot if you explain what you're doing so the next person can pick up where you left off.
Linux is based on UNIX, and UNIX and its relatives have been in the server room almost from the beginning. Short learning curve.
Phones and the like? No history, and the Linux-based Android just happens to lead the pack. Apple's iOS is IINM BSD-based while BlackBerry has transitioned to a QNX base. Luck of the draw, basically, and nothing to do with the OS itself. Linux leads mobiles regardless of it being Linux, not because of it.
Cars? Toss-up. Remember, QNX is in play as well.
But the key point is, they're not end-user computers, which is what most people (home and office) associate with computers. And in THAT key aspect, Linux is still struggling (Remember, MacOS is BSD, not Linux). Think, why is Valve having so much trouble getting developers to multiport games from Windows to the Linux-based SteamOS? Unlike all the other environments you describe, the end-user environment carries trememdous institutional momentum. For Linux to REALLY win the computer war, they have to deal with the 800-lb gorilla in the room known as PC institutional momentum, unless things like tablets are able to take over for PCs even for performance-intensive tasks (which I still don't predict for some time yet).
"If Linux wants to make it into the mainstream then this has to be the way to go and it can be installed this way it brings into question what all the partitioning is about in the first place ?"
No, if Linux wants to make it into the mainstream, then it needs to convince mainstream company to develop their programs for them, wil ne nil ye. The OS is nothing without the programs you need to actually get things done, and in that the Linux ecosystem is seriously lacking in persuasive power.
"This was hardly a blind sale, unless the IT security director had a policy that he wasn't to be told of any hacks it has to look suspicious that they put in a sell order just after the hack but weren't officially informed until a month later."
But because of the SEC rules such information would've been easy to deduce, meaning if something really was shady, why haven't criminal charges already been bright forth?