Re: This is weird
"a) the cops are wrong"
"b) Tesla are lying "
I think we should allow Elon to be just "wrong" rather than "lying". He's no less human than the cops.
8168 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jun 2007
It's a very interesting update. Whether it is "job done" when the local police are "100% convinced" that no-one was driving the car is another matter. If both statements are true, then we have to come up with a scenario where both passengers know the car doesn't drive itself and yet neither is at the wheel when it smacks at high speed into a tree.
Maybe such a scenario exists. My gut feeling, though, is that either the police or Elon are wrong.
"huge news for devs who have been requesting this for over a decade"
Genuinely surprised by this. If your *IDE* needs more than 2GB, you're doing it wrong. This is basically an editor/debugger with the ability to launch other programs like compilers. MS themselves long ago created a component framework to let multiple processes contribute to a single UI, so there is precisely zero technical reason to extend to 64-bits. I can see that there is equally no reason to stay at 32-bits, so I am not *surprised* if MS have had a rolling program of quietly porting components over and they have now finished that, so the fully 64-bit product can be released. But it is not huge news.
The huge news in development environments (and I'm pleased to note that it is mentioned in the Fine Article) is that VScode, which at least started life as a "stripped down, but runs almost anywhere" version of the VS editor, is arguably now as important as its ancestor. There's a lesson there for people who think that the next version of a product always has to have more gold-plated kitchen sinks than a previous version.
Something like this: https://www.theregister.com/2020/02/03/google_maps_hack_cartful_phones/
(I don't think that story provides evidence that Google continue to track, for traffic jam purposes, even after you've switched off location, but El Reg's article has links to the sort of things you were talking about. Also, I thought the story was very funny and deserves a re-posting every now and then.)
I have a sub to at least one website that is not required to view their content but which makes up for the fact that I adblock everything so they aren't getting revenue that way.
They aren't actually asking me to trust them, though I probably would. Instead, they have trusted me and it works.
Funnily enough, Google do (definitely) know where I am but these adverts don't. They think I live near my ISP's HQ. I sometimes wonder if the advertisers have paid for location profiling and are getting diddled. Then I remember who they are and what they are advertising and suddenly I cease to give a shit.
Not really. They would present a single "privacy " page with 100 settings each with a long-winded explanation, plus one handy opt-in-all button.
The trick is to include one or two items that nearly all users want, somewhere in the list. If the only way to make the pussy appear is to opt-in on one obscure thing, most users will opt-in-all.
Some websites already do this with cookie choices.
The distribution is not flat. The Russell Group is much richer that many "old polys" and one or two RG universities are much richer than most of the rest and within one of the RG, one of its college's cash piles has to be plotted on logarithmic axes if you want it on the same graph as all the others.
But actually, all that cash (wherever it lies) is probably not the issue. I suspect that the real issue is that universities have these things called students who are much harder to control (IT security-wise) than employees.
I assume they mean that you will get your degree even though you weren't able to learn any of the course material.
Whether future employers see that as "no disadvantage" probably depends on how many other universities are similarly affected, and whether this state of affairs lasts for more than a couple of years.
Right now I'd say that anyone still in full-time education is at something of a disadvantage compared to someone just a year or two older.
(I'd also like to point out that, despite the UK's recent announcement that unis are re-opening, a lot of them are still telling anyone without a practical element to their course to carry on with the online lectures, either at home or in the digs you've been trapped in since whenever.)
Is that mandatory, or simply the common practice? I'd have said that a language that *cannot* represent an interface without also providing the implementation is a language that is brain-dead because it can't consume any useful libraries that are written outside the language.
I would hope that the /subsequent/ premiums for maintaining the insurance would have the same effect. It seems amazing to me that insurers are not the ones making a killing here. Immediately /after/ a payout, both the insurer and the perpetrator know that the victim is ripe for a repeat attack so why would the insurer not adjust the premium accordingly, to be lowered to a less eye-watering level only once the customer has demonstrated (and continues to demonstrate under regular audit) safe working practices?
Nope, I think you've missed the point:
"The important files are my personal files, which I have full R/W access to."
That's the point. It is really hard to protect files that (in some sense) must not be protected!
I think you can probably do it with a SELinux setup that has religiously mapped out all of the required access for all of the packages that a user needs to do for their job, and then locked the whole system down. I bet that fewer than one in ten thousand Linux systems are configured that way and I bet there are fewer than ten thousand people on the entire planet with the expertise to do it.
If the article is correct then Musk has to launch 30,000 satellites every 5 years to maintain his constellation and that only provides low-bandwidth service. Notably, this is an on-going cost, not a capital one, so the cost of the service is unlikely to come down. It seems unlikely (to me) that rival technologies will not be able to reach nearly all of Musk's potential customers, with a significantly faster and cheaper service, with a combination of more down-to-earth tech like fibre backbones and 4G/5G radio links. Don't bother telling me that those aren't happening, because if *they* aren't commercially viable then Starlink certainly isn't.
Satellite broadband probably has a role in delivering emergency-level coverage to "just about anywhere". If Musk can deliver *that* for $100 a month then there are probably enough people (globally) to make that work. But as a daily driver internet service for residential customers? No way. No matter where you live.
There does seem to be a tendency for vendors to release patches on Microsoft's Patch Tuesday. That presumably has a similar effect, overloading the bad guys and buying the smaller vendors a little time.
And given the size of some MS offerings, who's to say that they aren't using your technique too?
Does China really have most of the world's supply? Or is it just that they have no environmental laws so they can undercut everyone else? I seem to recall that when they tried to put a squeeze on everyone else, all that happened was that mines everywhere else re-opened because they were now profitable.
I am reminded of Tim Worstall's observation a few years back: the known reserves of any mineable commodity are always some scarily small number of years because once you have a decade or two under your belt you stop looking, for a few years.
Perhaps they haven't seen Life of Brian. (Anecdote: I introduced my sons to these films and the reaction was mainly "Oh, so that's where all thememes came from.", so perhaps the IAAI haven't used the internet either.)
Or perhaps they just didn't understand the joke.
"Notice how no-one talks about the Turing test any more? That's because it was passed, ..."
It was? When? How? Who? I've never seen any computer system get anywhere close. Come to that, I've seen *people* fail it (usually working in institutions as customer-facing staff and following rule sets, to be fair). Or did they re-define Turing test, so that I'm not allowed to ask questions that any 5-year-old could answer but that fall outside the computer's domain of expertise? (For example, does this picture show baseballs or a bucket? Obviously a 5-year-old could answer that, but apparently an AI researcher can't.)
I wouldn't put it past some head-teachers to exclude you until it had grown back. (Particularly in the case of fee-paying schools, where the attitude seems to be that your parents have volunteered you into the system so the school can make up whatever shit they like.)
Here in the UK, a 12yo girl was excluded for several weeks before Christmas because her dress didn't show enough leg. Eventually the school began legal action against her parents for not sending her to school. (Then the story reached the national press and the school has now dropped the case.)
Also here in the UK, a website that collects stories from teenagers has collected numerous examples of girls wearing trousers under their (mandatory) school skirts to reduce the amount of sexual harassment.
It's almost like the kids want to have control over their own bodies. Shocking! They are at school to learn and they should learn to do as they are bloody well told by the Responsible Adults. Except that *some* of the responsible adults seem to be living on another planet.
But this is government we're talking about. Collecting up all those records for just one person is probably beyond them. Doing it for the entire population is just ridiculous. (In other words, they aren't paying for the information. They are paying for you to collect it up for them.)
So what? There is no chance that they'd be allowed to build a satellite jammer on land they own in the US and very little chance they'd be allowed to build something in one African country that blacked out all that country's neighbours. Even blacking out China would probably hobble India, Japan, etc to an extent that was seen as an act of agression.
If you manage to have sex in public whilst in your own home ... well done, but I think you will find it is still illegal.
Conversely, for the wild flowers case I think you will be able to argue that they aren't wild (by definition) if they arein your garden.
Better examples mighthave been things like theft and violence, which are definitely illegal in the home, even if it is your wife or children.
"Better still would be to ban modal dialogs outright, and force designers to come up with a UI that doesn’t need them to interrupt you to ask stupid questions in the first place…"
I've used interfaces like that. They are horrible. Modality is useful if an action requires several things to be specified at once. Some parts of reality are like that, so you can't just live/design in denial about it. By entering a modal dialog you ensure that only one such complicated action is in-flight in the user's head at any given time. That's usually good to encourage. UIs that have loads of modeless toolbars or docked thingummies about the place are the alternative. Sometimes that works. Usually you end up with an interface like Gimp or Blender, where the novice user runs screaming from the room.
I thought jpeg2000 was never used because the patent position was unclear, so I'm not sure what your point is. It sounds like there is prior art here, in the form of the actual inventor who wants it to be public, so if MS are allowed to kill it with legal FUD then we are all the losers.
Good news about everybody being safe, but...
Update 5:20pm. Everybody is safe.
Fire destroyed SBG2. A part of SBG1 is destroyed. Firefighters are protecting SBG3. no impact SBG4.
— Octave Klaba (@olesovhcom) March 10, 2021
We appear to be reading this tweet before it has been posted. If people move quickly enough, they may be able to migrate away from SBG2 before the fire starts.
"I'm wondering if the real fix for this is no SMP whatsoever..."
Nah. The real fix for this is to run your own code on your own hardware. Despite decades of marketing hype, and some pretty serious efforts at encrypted computation, it remains true that if you lose physical security, you lose security.
Given the collapsing costs of actual hardware and the availability of free-as-in-beer operating systems and hypervisors, the movement to renting space in someone else's machine, alongside god-knows-who and at the far end of a long wire, is surely one of the more unexpected trends of recent years.
The wider problem is that no-one seems to be training AIs on wider problems. A 1yo child has experience of the world through vision, sound, taste, smell, interaction, and (one hopes) the beginnings of a system of externally imposed behavioural constraints. When such a child sees a picture, they know it is a picture rather than the real thing but they can also understand that it can stand in for the real thing in some contexts, such as a conversation.
I haven't seen any reports of AIs being trained on such a broad range of inputs, so I'm not surprised that they still so easily led astray. I do wonder though whether the hardware is now beefy enough to start planning such experiments.
Haven't quite a few people in the UK recently been grandfathered into a new passport? Presumably they weren't offended. The concept of not losing a right that your grandparents had is pretty old and certainly predates the US. Obsessing over one particular abuse would seem to me to grant that abuse rather more weight than it deserves.