As far as I can tell, any IT project costing a billion or more is 100% guaranteed to fail.
Also, it sounds like they decided to source IT from Lufier, Mephistopheles and Satan, which incidentally also guarantees it to fail.
Oh I see. I parsed the and "and" as listing multiple different FECs, not as listing different applications to BCH codes.
Copyright is covered by international treaties; that is, it is mutually recognized everywhere. It is under those international agreements that Hong Kong agreed to cooperate with the US.
There has never been an actual conviction and yet the assets were seized. It was extraterritorial, extrajudicial enforcemnet of holywood lobbyist whims.
The equivalent here would be for France to ask the US government to help with enforcing France's privacy laws against a US company operating outside France.
That's not remotely equivalent because google has operations in France via a subsidiary.
It's similar to how they developed their high speed trains. The government did the basic research and development, and then it grew into a huge business where Japan lead the world for over 50 years.
Interestingly that's the exact opposite to the way the UK works. You see we put in all the risky research money to develop tilting trains. Then because "reasons"[1] it was shut down and sold off and we're now buying tilting trains from Pendolino (a foreign company which bought the rights cheap) at great expense. The original tilting train still holds the speed record on the relevant routes.
Which is a better investment, I shall leave as an exercise to the reader.
[1]The reasons were bogus. Some people claimed it made people feel ill. There was an early problem because the tilting compensation was too good. Dialling it back a bit solved the problem and the trains became no worse than the modern ones in that regard. Basically the reason is that no matter who is in power, parliament hates local industry for some reason.
Using error correction to achieve 0% loss over cheap ethernet cables is cheating.
Cheating how? This is a test of network cables. If the cable gives you 0% errors by any usable meant then it works perfectly. If I want my 60 kbit MP3s transferred losslessly over the network, I really don't give a crap if it's using trellis codes or retransmits.
[**NOTE: To be clear, I am NOT saying all wine is the same. There are a lot of different varieties and flavors. But I do believe you should just buy what you like. There are $5 wines that have easily beat out $100 wines at blind tastings. So, if you like a wine and discover it's only $5, keep buying and enjoying it. If you like the $100 wine, and you like the taste enough to pay $100, fine.]
I keep hereing this, and where can I find these cheap wines? Or is it that plenty of $100 wines come with a lingering afterburn too?
1000 Base T uses trellis codes.
I'm not sure how QR codes would help however...
As with many things there's a grain of truth, which is enough to get someone hooked. Oxygen free copper is a real thing and you can buy it in bulk. The main property is that it has far fewer small inclusions of copper oxide (hence oxygen free). While this does lower the elctrical resistance very marginally, that's not what it's for.
The problem with oxyide inclusions comes when working with compressed hydrogen. The hydrogen diffuses through, and slowly strips the oxygen from the copper creating tiny pockets of very high pressure steam. This causes serious embrittlement problems.
So unless you're operating your hifi deep on jupiter, in the native atmosphere, you probably don't need oxygen-free hifi cables.
The reason why it's not there
There is literally no reasy why it's not there by reason of it being, in fact, there. 1000 Base-T uses 5-4 trellis coding, already and the 10G over copper specs use LDPC codes.
That needs to go away. We need an Ethernet protocol extension with BCH or Hamming code support.
Ooh good call. But I suggest you go with the much more modern and effective LDPC codes. You can then call your suggestion 802.11n or 10GBase-T. Maybe you could go for simpler weaker codes like trellis coding. I think 1000Base-T might be a good name for your system.
The French government doing things to Google France because they don't like what Google USA does would set a disastrous precedent for anybody doing business in France
Why? The UK had anti bribery laws with much the same reach, and the US was all over mega upload. It's not like things like this are unprecedented, and yet business continues. No one thinks they'll be the next test case.
Well, no not really. Right or wrong play no part in how this is going to play out. Thiongs will happen regardless of my opinions on the morality of it.
No one gets to impose their views on France. People get to impose their views on corporations where part of the corporation operates in their country. Those sre the consequences one has to reason about.
Now, France is the 6th largest economy which gives them considerably more bargaining power than many of the other places you mentioned. In every case google can decide to play ball or leave. And they will need to evaluate in each case whether the impact of leaving is worse financially than the impact of staying.
That is how it will play out. Right and wrong has nothing to do with it, because frankly google doesn't care about right and wrong and neither domost other large companies.
You seem to misunderstand me. This isn't a question of right or wrong so much as a question of if google wants to operate in France, they have to make their worldwide operations acceptable to the French.
If they don't want to do that, they can choose to give up the huge pile of shiny lucre from the world's 6th largest economy.
Even if they want to maximise revenue it's still a tricky optimization. If they stick to too many global censorship laws they will risk people going elsewhere and therefore lose money. If they don't, they risk losing money by not operating in certain countries. From their point of view, some countries are worth keeping, others are not.
You misunderstand. I'm not arguiong right or wrong here.
The French governmant can literally ask for whatever they want. And while google has a presence in the country they can enforce their demands on the portion of google residing in France.
The choice is therefore to behave globally in a way the French find acceptable or never do any business in France at all. Such things are in fact not without precedent. For example the UK has anti bribery laws, and they're specified in such a way that they can traverse the graph of corporate ownership, so if you have a UK subshdiary of a global company and some other subsidiary is caught bribing people, there's hell to pay in the UK.
So yeah, while google want French money, they have to do what the French want.
Is it though? They won essentially all of Scotland. Having 8.6% of the MPs seems fairly reasonable.
They got 4.7% of the vote and have 8.6% of the MPs. How is massive overrepresentation reasonable? It's on a pure numbers game it's a worse overrepresentation than the Tories have though of course it's not as bad as either the UKIP or Lib Dem underrepresentation.
FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis
