If it's mobile surely that should be wireless fraud.
Where did I put my phone?
42530 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
The only time I was involved with DECNet the Ethernet addresses assumed that the NIC was made by DEC and hardcoded the DEC-specific part of the MAC. If you wanted to use DECNet on some non-DEC kit you have to overwrite the MAC. How is this handled these days when the NICs are anything but DEC?
We were using HP-PA hardware and first turned on the DECNet stack in the middle of the working day. This meant that all nodes using the HP server now had invalid addresses in their caches... The clamour from the users died down as their PCs re-synchronized.
The two paragraphs starting at "But take a system with a trained neural network." say pretty well what's the whole problem with this: trusting a black box to get the right answer. "But reproducibility is notoriously difficult in machine learning."
However the next bit: "You need access to the training data and other settings to recreate it. That becomes problematic if the data is medical or personal info, or proprietary" really suggests the solution to the conundrum. It's data that matters. It can be protected by copyright, assuming, that is, that the trainers had the rights to that data in the first place.
"The stuff in the media is that wee nuclear produces thirty five times more waste per kilowatt."
35 time more waste what?
The "what" matters. What are the characteristics: type of radiation, energy, half life, chemistry? Is this 35 times more bulk with traces of radioactivity or 35 time more radionuclides? Are we dealing wih elements that are easily immobilised or elements whose chemistry leads them to be leached out of whatever you might try to trap them in.
"more radioactive" is a vague term. It might simply mean that you have more of it - 2 tons as opposed to 1 ton. It might also mean, as you suggest, a short half-life. It could even mean higher energy or a more damaging form of radiation.
"More reactive" in the article is also vague. In what way? Does it mean a radioactive isotope that's chemically reactive or just something that's not radioactive but chemically aggressive? And why can't something that's "reactive" be neutralised by virtue of its reactivity; HF, for instance is very reactive but react it with Ca(OH)2 and you get calcium fluorite which isn't.
So you say what you want and somebody simply replies that they can do that you'll either (a) take them at their word and follow up even though a longer reply would have made it clear that they couldn't or (b) take pot luck out of them and the 50 other replies that say the same thing because you've no way of differentiating between them.
"apparently done as much with their life as the older in less than half the time"
If the older one hasn't done as much as you might expect that might be a cause for consern. But when the younger one has apparently done more than you might expect then you should consider their real talent might be in creative writing.
No. It's not clearly expressed but I think the point was that studies comparing age distributions in appointments with age distributions in the original applications are unsatisfactory as a measure of age discrimination. That's because they don't see the self-excluded. The age distribution of the original applicants isn't representative of the job-seeking population.
The researchers know very well that such terms get into the job ads. What they maybe haven't considered is that the applicants are using them to screen the advertisers to eliminate the jobs they wouldn't want anyway. Discrimination plays both ways.
Word of mouth recommendations come from people who already have the information you'd otherwise see on the CV. That's very different from a mere covering letter.
I find it difficult to understand exactly what you'd expect to see on a CV from someone with a couple of degrees and 20 years post-doc experience that wouldn't distinguish them in terms of age from someone who has 6 years work experience after leaving school at the earliest opportunity but would nevertheless enable you to decide which to follow up.
I suppose the longer version of that is that the existing staff are on final salary schemes. New staff will be recruited into defined contribution schemes with far fewer long term implications. That also applies to older recruits but it might be difficult to get away with making older staff redundant and then replacing them at the same seniority level.
"I really don't want to go on a recruitment merry-go-round only to then discover that the environment is just not for me."
It sounds as if this research put numerous people on a recruitment merry-go-round for jobs that didn't even exist, all to prove the bleedin' ovious. What did their Universities' ethics committees make of that one? Why does it remind me of that research project submitting bad pull requests to Linux?
"gets the job done with as little fiddling as possible, Mint readily beats Ubuntu, Fedora, openSUSE, or any flavor of Debian"
I had Mint on a rarely used laptop which got a few steps behind current. In that situation I found the update process convoluted to the point of being broken. It was easier to do a new install rather then update in place. In the end I decided a fresh install of Devuan was less fiddly.
"why else would they always include that 'Read in Web Browser' button"
So that those who (as the senders see it) haven't worked out how to avoid reading emails in plain text won't be denied the opportunity to see the sender's latest brain fart in all its mult-icoloured, multi-font, flashing, Comic Sans glory. After all they took so much time putting it together it would be a shame to miss it.
Yes, marketing departments really think you're interested.
What's needed isn't an email client that attempts to render HTML. What's needed is one that autoreplies with a message that the email has been delete, please resend in plain text.
No, scrub that as a client. What's needed is a server that bounces the message. Also one which bounces if the ReplyTo: is noreply or the message contains text to that effect.