Re: SCO Unix
Of course it's that way on "real Unix". Where do you think Linux got it from? I suppose that a bit of pottering about in the future will change it sooner or later; everything else seems under threat.
41748 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
In my case it was mv rather than rm but with much the same effect. The fly in the ointment (apart from the fact that it was my client's production box) was that the vendor of had installed the SCO OS and included a non-standard driver. I can't remember whether it was for the multi-port serial card or the disks. Whatever it was we didn't have a copy of it, we couldn't reinstall without it and spent much of the next day waiting for one to be emailed. Once we got that it only took a short time to get up and running again.
"t's suggested in the discussion that an enterprise customer asked specifically for a guarantee that admins in China and Russia could not access its data through GitLab and GitLab has no technical means to prevent that."
If the last part of that is true they have bigger problems than where their employees live.
"when politicians decide that they need to start beating the drums to get elected and folk fall for that old trick yet again, you can be sure that the villages will be burning soon."
I read On Agression about the time the troubles were starting up again in the late '60s. It was an amazingly accurate description of the behaviour displayed by politicians then.
" have no doubt some did vote in particular to end free movement (particularly in historically Labour areas) as said free movement was at least perceived to be depressing wages."
They're going to have a bit of a shock when they find what happens to wages when their employer, who's in the UK as an EU base, or their employer's direct or indirect customer for similar reasons, buggers off. Even without that particular exposure disappearing businesses will affect wages through unemployment. Still, don't worry; jam tomorrow.
"government project where the poor guys trying to run the damn thing are micromanaged by 6 dozen competing agencies all trying to assert their control of said flagship project."
The first thing to specify on a project like that are the locks. The ones on the doors that keep the micromanagers out.
Back in the days before the PC if a business didn't have a mainframe (most of them) there would be well established manual procedures for handling documents. In particular there would be trained secretaries and filing clerks. Part of starting a new job would be to learn what the procedures were to follow. For instance when I started in the lab I'd be shown how case files were started at reception, why we used duplicate lab notebooks with the top copies going into the case files and case files and typed up reports going back to reception to be filed.
We now have a situation where "the computer" is expected to take over a lot of that handling. But the business-wide manual procedures haven't been replaced by ones suitable for the new environment. Part of the problem might be that a lot of what the secretarial or clerical staff did has fallen to those who those staff used to support. Part of it might be that older secretarial staff who were trained in a pre-PC world haven't been retrained or that training hasn't kept pace with IT facilities. Part may be that such practices as are in place are heavily influenced by the days of stand-alone PCs. And a huge chunk of it is that "the computer" simply doesn't do that job on its own.
It should be up to the business as a whole to decide and tell new staff "how we do things here". Obviously it's going to involve IT to ensure that what users are instructed to do works with backup procedures etc. That's part of the deciding by the business as a whole; IT is part of the whole business (What? You've outsourced it? Now you really have a problem because a big IT-shaped part of your business is missing.). But because it's how we, the business, do things it's not IT telling people what to do.
The deciding is going to have to involve senior people, those who traditionally had the support of the secretarial staff because the "we" in "how we do things here" is going to have to include them. The VP and the legal secretary of earlier comments who kept stuff on their desktops would previously have had somebody else to do their filing; now they have to use whatever's provided to do it themselves.
How hard is it to insert a step before the "reformat drive" where the support dude he sent makes a quick copy of My Documents?
It depends on circumstances. If the user is screaming to get the PC back in action they're not going to be happy if you start booting up a recovery CD to get the files off.
"What question do I ask for Windows?"
Tell them you really need the licence number otherwise you won't know which one they're ringing about. Yes, you're looking after about 1,000 of them. Really get his hopes up that he's landed a big fish. Or phish.
"they used to produce good quality printers. Adding a scanner on top really should have been easy for them"
They did that. My HP all-in-one works just fine. And keeps on working. Unfortunately for HP it means I'll never need to buy another. They don't like that so the later ones are cheaper to build and you will need to buy another. That seems to be the thinking. It back-fired. I wanted to buy a colour one. Having seen more recent HP printers I didn't buy my colour one from them. Maybe it does work overall because there do seem to be places where nobody ever got fired for buying from HP.
"which IIRC contains 23 separate needles for the strains"
It's a long time ago but IIRC the multiple needle thing was the test which was supposed to come up and leave a scab if it was positive. The scab could leave a permanent scar. You used to see people with one or even two scars the size of an old halfpenny on their upper arm. My test? Not the slightest reaction so I got the jab with a singe needle.
There's no excuse for this inability to handle classification errors: had it been able to see "something" was moving on a fixed course, things probably wouldn't have come to this.
There may be no excuse in terms of letting the thing loose on the road but there's a likely reason. If there's more than one unclassified object in view then from one sample to the next it can't link up these to "know" that one was on a fixed course because it can't keep close enough track on them because it can only do things sequentially.
"most objects will be static"
Unless the vehicle's stationary they're all dynamic because they're being observed from the viewpoint of the vehicle Parallax will ensure that even objects static relative to each other will have the angles between them change from the PoV of the vehicle..
"Unfortunately, deleting the movement history every 1/10th of a second isn't going to help get it right!"
The movement history is simply the tracking of what's recognised as the same object in 1/10th of a second intervals. If you can't reconcile some of the objects with the objects in the next sample you either have to discontinue your movement history or accept that there are N possible continuations based on the number of possible options to identify the unclassified objects with their candidates in the previous sample. Unless you can successfully identify objects from one sampling of a scene to the next you have a combinatorial explosion of possible trajectories to consider.