Seems like one could make a cape for BeagleBoard or an add on for Rpi with the IO and an emulator for the BBCMicro.

Actually I am impressed that it did see how similar Apes and people are. Honestly people getting upset over it are just a bit silly. The problem is people think that someone put person_of_african_descent == ape in the code and that is not true. The algorithm just confused one great ape with an expressive face with another. It is no more racist or intentional than the same system confusing a Camaro with a Firebird.
 

+1

Not to be sexist, but most women prefer jobs that include more interaction with people and less time spent in solo problem solving, so it's not terribly surprising that she does't love coding. This isn't to say there aren't women who really like coding, or even introverted women who find working with people all day to be unpleasant. There are all kinds... but on average my observation is that women prefer more human interaction.

So, assuming that your wife falls into that category, there are lots of roles in and around software development that are more people-focused. Project management requires an additional set of skills, both people skills and management skills, but it's eminently learnable, and having a technical background is very valuable -- as long as it doesn't cause her to second-guess what the developers are telling her (always a risk with PMs, and even more with those whose technical background is shallower than they think it is. There's a tendency to assume that everything they don't know how to do is easy.)

Business Analyst is another good one. It, again, requires some additional skills she probably doesn't have but can learn. Industry knowledge tends to be important, but most companies are okay with analysts learning that context on the job. She also needs to learn how to gather and document requirements. A technical background is useful there because good requirements need quite a bit more precision than most non-technical people are used to. There's also a risk; formerly-technical BAs have a tendency to overspecify. An important skill for this role which isn't so easy to learn is writing. Good BAs are excellent writers, able to concisely and accurately boil complex issues down to simple statements.

Another option that might be excellent if she can swing it is Systems or Application Architect. Companies generally want experienced, senior developers to move into these roles, but smart but less-experienced people can do it as well. Architects take the business requirements and convert them into high-level technical plans/architectures. Architects tend to spend less time interacting with people than PMs or BAs, but still quite a bit since they provide the primary interface between the technical and business teams. Architects need to have good technical skills and good "taste", meaning a good feel for what sorts of structures are easy to build, easy to maintain and flexible, and for how to intelligently trade those issues off. They also need to be good at translating technical issues into language the business people can understand. Honestly I expect that your wife probably doesn't have the depth of experience needed to make a good architect, but I thought I'd throw it out.

Another that might be good if she's a good writer and enjoys writing is technical writing. Good tech writers have greater need for writing skill than they do technical skill, but the latter is very valuable because it enables them to more quickly and accurately understand the information that needs to be documented.

In smaller companies a lot of these roles get mixed and combined with other business roles, so another good option is to look for a position that isn't necessarily directly related to software development, but could benefit from having a deeply IT-literate person.

Finally, the option that I've long thought I'd take if I ever got tired of writing code is the law. It's a lot of additional training, but I think there is a deep and growing need for attorneys who understand technology. This is especially true in the areas of patent and copyright law, but I think it applies in many areas. Of course, the law may not have any attraction whatsoever for your wife.

Whatever, I'd really encourage her to take the time to figure out what she wants to do, and do that, rather than settling for something she doesn't really like. We so much of our lives working that it's really a waste to spend it doing something we don't like.

Network security yes.
the OMG Cisco is buying them and the Gov will spy on me now is what I could live without.

Thanks Googleing is all fine and good but a recommendation from someone that used it makes all the difference IMHO.

This is completely untrue. The electorate is pretty divided, and whether you can find a majority depends which poll you look at, and which week. The fact is that there is a significant part of the electorate that thinks bulk surveillance is fine because they have nothing to hide and it keeps us safe. That they're wrong on both counts doesn't change their opinion, or their votes

And yet they passed the USA Freedom Act which, although better than the PATRIOT Act, still authorizes way too much surveillance. And in the process they failed to do anything to curtail article 702 of the FISA, which is the basis for the FISA court's ruling -- as was completely predictable before passage of USA Freedom. The argument is that while article 702 authorizes only surveillance of foreign people, the court considers it perfectly reasonable for the NSA to hoover up ALL the data and then figure out later what they can and cannot look at. This all comes back to the NSA's choice to define "collect" as "look at", since the law hadn't defined the term.

Congress had a perfect opportunity to define "collect" as "collect", and chose not to.

The problem is fundamentally the electorate, which isn't sufficiently convinced that bulk data collection is a bad thing. If 80% of the voters wanted it shut down, enough to make it a major election issue, it would be shut down. But as is Congress knows that with a slim majority (at best) concerned about data collection, if they shut it down and then Something Bad happened the voters would turn on them like a rabid dog.

The system isn't perfect, but it is basically working as intended. We just need to convince more of our fellow Americans that surveillance is bad.

No, but this particular comparison is. Besides all of the stuff s2n doesn't provide, s2n actually uses OpenSSL's libcrypto to provide the implementations of all of its crypto algorithm. A useful comparison could be made between OpenSSL's TLS layer and s2n, with some caveats listing the TLS features s2n doesn't provide.

Note that none of this means that s2n doesn't have value. If you don't need the other OpenSSL features, it's a lot less code to audit.

This is for a cluster that is being used not an exhibit in a glass box.
I think modifying the existing power supplies is probably the best way to go today. Replace the caps and possibly the voltage regulators with newer parts might be a really good way to go today.
I would suggest starting a project to create a modern PS that could be a drop in replacement for the old one. It could use a lot less power and be more reliable in the long run.

No one owes him anything. It may not matter to the GPL'd code's author whether this guy wants to use it in his own code or not. There are lots of reasons for writing code.

It's absolutely not a stupid line. The guy who GPL'd the code wrote it so he can do what he wants with it. That is his right. Surely this other developer can write his own code too? Of course GPL'd people don't use that line with end users. After all they are free to use the software however they see fit. That's what the GPL says.

As for toybox, llvm, etc. Good for them. Competition is a good thing. LLVM rejuvenated the stagnant GCC project. As for busybox vs toybox, toybox certainly is the better choice if the company doesn't know how to comply with the GPL or is too lazy to do so. For too long companies thought open source, particularly "free software" mean public domain. It does not, regardless of license. There are obligations under copyright law for all source code licenses, even proprietary ones like MS's royalty-free runtime redistribution licenses.

I can't believe you would say these things and advocate killing more innocents, even if you're just playing devils advocate! And you got modded up too. But even worse you pass judgements on individuals you know nothing about.

I guess you haven't read up on the drone pilot news lately then. Burn-out is super high because drone pilots do have consciences. One guy talked[1] about being ordered to fire on some bad guys, shooting a missile at them, and then watching as one of them bled to death in the sand. On IR camera he could see the guy slowly get cold. That was more traumatic than you and I know. The effects of this and other incidences on this pilot have led to debilitating emotional difficulties. And that's not an uncommon experience.

Now this same pilot, had he been over in Afghanistan, in the thick of things, and under real danger and fire could have killed without remorse. The justification would be as much self defense as anything. But far removed from the action, the trauma of killing was much much more intense. And then going home afterward to a "normal" life with the wife an kids just amplifies the trauma for many personnel.

If you want to target the inhuman American war machine, go ahead. War crimes are war crimes, no doubt about it. But to claim drone pilots have no conscience is just wrong.

[1] http://www.spiegel.de/internat...

Links?

actually I am not very worried about DNS privacy.
I just wish we could go back to the old days of Slashdot when it was all about cool dads building battlemech tree houses instead of the tin foil hat crowd.

You tool of the megacorps how dare you bring up facts that distort that crusader for freedom's self identified truth.

So any DNS you use could do this.
So isn't it logical to use one that is being run by a massive competent company that is already making huge profits and has the whole world watching them vs some small org that is just trying to make ends meet that no one is paying attention to.
Frankly if I was the CIA I would be intercepting traffic to the small oddball servers more than Google.

There are private security personnel with miniguns? Are they accepting applications? I don't actually want the job, I just want to go through training and shoot the guns.