Re: The universe is weird, we want a refund
Fig. 3.1 is entertaining, but Fig. 3.2 tells you how to do it!
It's all fun and games until Godzilla arrives.
2277 posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
@Pascal Monett - "I declare this unsolvable"
I came to the comments looking for a detailed post from someone with the same problem who:
a) successfully investigated it
b) lists the code for the fix
c) still has the fix running
It's what usually happens around here...
@Dom 3 - "Saying that the next crew to go to the Moon *will* include a woman is prejudice."
I did say that it was a consequence of the discriminatory selection procedure for the Apollo program. If the Artemis program gets as far as putting anyone on the moon, then the probability of one of those being a woman, assuming perfectly non-discriminatory selection, would rapidly approach 1. When 5 people had landed, if none of them were a woman, then most scientists would reject the null hypothesis, "there is no discrimination against women in the selection" at the 95% confidence limit. Most non-scientists would say there's discrimination if the first 2 were men. The selection will be influenced by the political need to "redress the balance" of past discrimination.
"At that level there is still competence vs. incompetence." Well, I'm sure everyone has the occasional bad day. Maybe the training program doesn't accurately reveal the "true merit" of the candidates, but that doesn't change the fact that the decision was made based on the best available measure of the merit of the candidates.
Anyone who completes the training program will be there on merit. What sort of requirement were you imagining that would disqualify half the citizens of America? The Artemis program will, surely, send more than two people in total to the Moon, so, as a consequence of the discriminatory selection procedure for the Apollo program, a woman candidate will become the first woman on the moon.
Unless, of course, China or India get there faster.
@AC - "They published a handy chart for those who can't be bothered to read:"
Thanks for the chart... but do the rules make sense?
So, the first assumption appears to be that a person only remains infectious for 7 days after they show symptoms... is that true?
Even if that is true, a person can go out again 14 days after the first person in their household shows symptoms. Using the example of Household 2, person D might isolate from the rest of the household, but then contact and become infected from person C on day 19, after they are allowed out. They might not show symptoms for another 13 days, spreading the infection further.
Am I missing something, or is this based on, "well, that's only going to happen in a small percentage of households" wishful thinking?
The HK Government has now admitted that the wristband and app does not work as advertised. “If the person only left their place without their phone, there is no signal from the band [triggered],” Lam (Gov. CIO) said. The only point in using the wristband, Lam added, was that a separate smartphone app, which has location-sharing functions, would randomly request scanning of a QR code from the band.
I guess they haven't considered the possibilities of copying the QR code?
@jason_derp - "Ugh! I really hate being reminded"
I'm sorry I triggered that, I tend to agree with your sentiment, my post was just trying to explain the situation, not cause mental trauma.
Comparing Canada and the UK, the UK's suffered under foreign monarchs for a thousand years or more, but we do get tourist dollars... or would, if the borders weren't closed. When we do travel, there's always a suspicion we should be apologising for invasions our ancestors never got to vote about.
@Bruce Ordway - "I wonder how easy it would be to hack in this case?"
Don't forget the motivation... if hacking DARTS could help someone avoid a 20 year jail sentence, then they might be willing to invest a sizeable lump of ill-gotten gains in the best hackers available.
All part of the context.
@Waseem Alkurdi - "users could magically retrain themselves when it comes to Facebook/Instagram/Twitter/$ANTISOCIAL_APP/$PHONE_OS"
No, new users train themselves. Retraining never happens, when the technology changes the old users are sent to the retirement home, muttering about this new-fangled stuff they can't understand. Just look at the demographics of Facebook users.
@bombastic bob - "It was TRULY SUPERIOR to EVERYTHING at that time, except maybe for OS/2, which Microsoft ALSO wrote."
It's worth adding that the key difference that made OS/2 superior was the pre-emptive multi-tasking. Win 3.1 had "co-operative multitasking", meaning the OS would pass control to each task in turn, if it ever got control back from the badly-behaved ones. On Win 3.1, you didn't want to do anything during a big download, just scrolling too fast in your wordprocessor document might cause too much delay and a timeout in the download protocol.
To complete the history lesson (not for you, bob, for the PFYs), after MS and IBM argued, they continued development independently, MS renaming their version to NT. The Win 3.1 line continued through 95, 98 and ended at Win ME, so Windows 10 is a direct descendant of OS/2.
@IGotOut - Well, if we're checking facts, then you should know that bats were eaten... the bats weren't in an overcrowded market packed in amongst snakes and fish because they were looking for a good deal on a designer brand. But the cooking process probably prevented anyone being infected by the bat they were actually eating.
And before anyone starts blaming a country for unhygienic conditions in the food supply chain, take a look at chlorinated chicken. There is lots of room for improvement, everywhere.
@AC - "Oh dear how our memories are short.
I lived in China during the bird flu (1997) and SARS (2003) - the only infectious thing then was fear."
So was I (specifically, Hong Kong), and I remember the Y2K problem too (see icon). Did the disaster scenario fail to materialise because it was never a threat, or because lots of people were taking action (checking and updating computers/washing hands and wearing masks)?
We know that newly-emerging diseases can have high mortality rates; the black death killed maybe 25% of the population of Europe; the 1918 flu pandemic killed 20 - 50 million people, more than all the soldiers and civilians killed in World War I.
COVID-19 has already killed 3131 (up to 3rd March). This is more than 1997 bird flu (6 people in Hong Kong, and 1.3 million chickens killed and incinerated as a precaution); more than SARS 2003 (774 deaths worldwide).
It hasn't reached the level of H1N1 in 2009 (150,000–575,000 fatalities) yet, but those deaths were spread over almost 2 years. There is still a lot we don't understand about COVID-19. The mortality rate appears to be significantly higher than seasonal flu, but is that just because there are many undiagnosed infections? Cases are appearing where there is no traceable contact with known cases, some people have appeared to recover, have no detectable virus, but then fall ill again after release. Coronaviruses usually die out in warm conditions, so this might all disappear as summer approaches, but MERS is also a coronavirus, and MERS was able to spread in some rather warm places.
So, is it really that much of an imposition to follow good medical advice? Wash your hands frequently, and, as I'm in HK, I'll wear a mask when I'm out, not so much for my protection, but it's worth it if I'm a symptomless carrier and it prevents someone else being infected.
"ability to detect and avoid unintended consequences"
Note that "target not killed" would be an unintended consequence.
"the ability to disengage or deactivate deployed systems that demonstrate unintended behavior"
How long before the AI learns that is must deactivate the deactivation system to be sure of completing its mission? There was a documentary about this.
@Cynic_999 - "Lets' see how the police react when a wanted villain is spotted in a hundred different locations at the same time."
Uh... they make 100 arrests, and get successful convictions for "obstruction of a Police office in the course of his duty", or "wasting Police time", or "conspiracy to defraud", so their success statistics soar!
@AC - "Why can't we all just agree to write dates with the most significant digits first and the least significant digits last."
We did agree, see ISO 8601 (obligatory XKCD).
On the other hand... yyyy-mm-dd is Chinese date format, so this is obviously definitive proof that Huawei is already hacking UK telecoms infrastructure from the future (and therefore definitely planted by the NSA).
[Edit] - You left off the century?! Barbarian! Heathen!! Heretic!!!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020