Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:thing i don't understand (Score 1) 110

by sumdumass (#47734881) Attached to: Finding an ISIS Training Camp Using Google Earth

I do not disagree with your sentiment, I just perceive Obama's dilemma as being such that he will loose face whichever way he goes so I think he is going to pick whatever is most favorable to him according to the people he cares to impress.

Otherwise, who is going to pay him $2mil a speech or give his daughters a cushy job so his future is secure......It's like drawing a line in the sand and having Russia bail them out when it appears that not only was it crossed, but they were pissing all over your sand castle while doing it.

I'm reminded of an old asterix and obelix cartoon where in one of the scenes, asterix is in a roman tower and obelix outside and they try to go to each other pummeling the Romans along the way just to realize they switched places and have to do it again. Near the end, a roman soldier cries out, maybe if we are quiet, they won't see us or something like that.

Comment: Re:Full of it (Score 1) 334

by sumdumass (#47734859) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

Go back and read what I said again.

Ignoring those differences is probably the "stupidest most arrogant statement I have read in a long time".

Also, I do not really care about what you think is barbaric. We are not Europe and Europe is not us. We have different ways and different outcomes and this is by design.

Comment: Re: Correlation is not causation (Score 1) 172

Or it could be simply internet penetration.

According to the US census stats, it appears that 86% of individuals in Massachusetts live in household that have internet access while only 64% in Mississippi do. (according to the Table 1. Reported Internet Usage for Individuals 3 Years and Older, by Selected Characteristics: 2012)

I would be interested in finding how much this usage or penetration correlates to the speeds or if it could be correlated to scores also.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1) 412

by bmajik (#47734635) Attached to: Tech Looks To Obama To Save Them From 'Just Sort of OK' US Workers

*raises hand*

I've posted about this before many times.

I have a pulse
I am not sure about having a conscience -- that may disqualify me.
I have an IQ over 30
I am a citizen
I am not a politician
I am not a CEO.

I've been an engineer at Microsoft since 2000. I've worked on developer tools and ERP products. I've worked in Redmond; I currently work in Fargo.

I have interviewed hundreds of people for Microsoft positions. I am not a manager, but I've played manager at times. I understand the compensation system quite well, and how it has evolved over my 15 years at the company.

I have also worked with non-citizens and non-native born my entire career, including many who are on H1-Bs currently.

You could go and dig through my old posts if you wanted to. I'll try and give the short version

1) In my opinion, Microsoft pays very well. If i lost my job in North Dakota, I think i'd be taking a huge pay cut to work anywhere else. I base this on the numbers people throw out when I've interviewed with other companies. (You get frustrated from time to time in 15 years with the same company. I've shopped around. I've stayed put)

2) There are a lot of "paper qualified" people out there. I can't hire even half of the ones I talk to.

I see both ends of the "funnel" of candidates. For university recruiting trips, there is essentially no filtering done before I get to talk to them. For industry hires, they had to get through a few people before they talk to me.

We're already paying a competitive wage and we cannot hire many of the people we talk to. The obvious move is to try and expand the # of people we're able to talk to.

3) For a variety of reasons, it is MORE expensive for Microsoft to deal with H1-B candidates. There are all kinds of legal costs and challenges, as well as employee time wasted dealing with immigration bullshit -- that normal domestic employees do not incur.

For each domestic job type at Microsoft, there is a flyer posted in the breakroom that says what the title is, what the qualifications are, and what the salary range is. The salary ranges are the ones I am familiar with. Any H1-B could simply look at the flyer, and if they were getting paid less than that, they could lawyer up and retire. Every state's attorney in the US would want in on that lawsuit. Saving a few thousand dollars a year on salary costs couldn't possibly be worth it to us.

4) I feel no particular allegience to "the american worker". So you were good at choosing where your parents were when you were born? And the benefits of this should accrue to you WHY?

I am interested in people who will improve the caliber of my company and the caliber of my society. Hard working, intelligent people often have that potential. I don't care about where they were born. i care about what they will do.

I want the US to suck every brilliant engineer out of India and China. I don't want China getting any better at matching the US military industrial complex, and I want India to change its society so that innovators can effect meaningful change there, instead of being trapped in a hopeless system of patronage and bribery.

(have you talked to Indians who are in the US? There's a reason they are here...)

I would love to have the problem of drowning in qualified American talent. But that isn't a problem I've ever had in my entire career.

Finally, before you run your mouth about Microsoft not doing anything about to help with the domestic labor supply, Microsoft pays for me to volunteer 1 hour a day teaching Computer Science at a local high school. I start my 2nd year this Monday. I'll be helping teach a section of AP Computer Science -- in JAVA. Do you think this is some kind of sweetheart deal for MS? They are losing my work time, they are giving money to the school, and I am teaching the kids using Eclipse and the Java stack -- the direct competitors to the product and ecosystem that I work on (i work on Visual Studio).

What we're doing, is widening the pipeline of people who get exposed to CS, so that hopefully, more of them do CS in college, and more of them are GOOD at it. That is going to help the entire industry.

I don't know what experiences you've had, but I feel confident in saying that they haven't been at Microsoft.

Comment: Re:Neurons aren't just in the brain (Score 1) 25

by sumdumass (#47734575) Attached to: A Better Way To Make Mind-Controlled Prosthetic Limbs

I was wondering the same thing. A possible answer might be that if the limb isn't there long enough, the ability to send the neurons along the proper paths may be lost so capturing them closer to home might be a better solution. Or it could be because the implants are already installed for other purposes in the patients they are studying and getting the control process to work is more important at this stage than how it is eventually used. It could be that they plan on moving the control devices later and taking advantage of the others.

Something else I was thinking about, how long before something like this can control the entire body making it possible for dead people to be artificially resurrected and have a computer installed in the brain. sort of electric zombies or something. Perhaps this will end up with robots being mind controlled also- where an operator thinks about grasping an object in a hazardous area and the robot does so as naturally as a human could via a prosthetic. This might make dangerous situations like entering a burning building or a fukishima type plant disaster easier due to a lot of the controls being created for human interaction verses remote robotics.

Comment: Re:thing i don't understand (Score 2) 110

by sumdumass (#47734387) Attached to: Finding an ISIS Training Camp Using Google Earth

I'm not sure Obama can politically afford to get too carried away with bombing ISIS. Whether it is true or not, there is plenty of talk that Obama allowed this to happen by not keeping troops in Iraq longer. He blames the Iraqi government for not updating the SOFA agreements but people have been claiming that Hillary (presumable under Obama's orders) kept increasing demands that couldn't be met by the Iraqi government. He then declared his campaign promise has been realized and ended the war on terror to boot.

So how does he go back and say the war on terror is not over, how does he come back and say we need to go back into Iraq after claiming the people foreseeing this were nutters, how does he do this without giving credibility to all those decrying our exist from the world or who said if we did not lead in Syria, something evil would fill the void. The problem is, he seems to believe that if we mind our own business, the world will not hate us, will not want to kill us, and situations like this will not exist.

Now I will admit that all that may not be 100% true, but it is the perception people are getting and it is the perception he seems to be afraid of when he has to acknowledge his foreign policy was a failure, that his plans for peace didn't work. This is what he is up with, he is either claimed to be wrong on everything and allow it to happen, or he has to admit he was wrong and do something about it that goes against what he seems to believe.

I dropped that comic because it does appear that he is more occupied playing golf than the problems in the world. But to be fair, if you can golf somewhat well, it is a relaxing and peaceful time in which you can actually think things through. This is probably why so much business gets done on the gold course.

Comment: Re:I'm looking now (Score 2) 110

by sumdumass (#47734275) Attached to: Finding an ISIS Training Camp Using Google Earth

I'm sorry but where have you been these last few months?

Iraq has been asking the US to send in the troops for a while now. We have been ignoring them and playing games claiming that the Maliki government caused ISIS to happen and more or less forced him out of office before we would help. Now we are doing limited bombings and offering strategy meetings with about 1000 troops in the area supposedly to protect US personnel. We were going to go in and rescue some people on a mountain but I guess they were either killed or escaped by other means. We did drop food and water I think.

Comment: Re:Full of it (Score 1) 334

by sumdumass (#47734047) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

The Universal Service Principal is hardly a common concept yet there is the capability of other countries to allow competition both at an infrastructure and access level. I think you will also find that there is absolutely no USP for internet access above an abysmally low level.

I'm not even sure how this is relevant. In other countries, they throw acid in the face of women who do not cover their face and execute gays. What do we learn from this? Other countries do things differently and some things may pass as appropriate but it doesn't mean it will here.

And no, I'm not comparing torturing women or killing gays to giving away the internet, I'm saying that their structures are different, their governments are different, so what they do doesn't always line up with ours.

More fundamentally though I do not understand why you feel there should be no competition at a municipal level. A township has no requirement, legally or morally, to support a different township through subsidisation. And that is exactly what you are arguing by saying the cash cows need to exist to fund other areas. If a local government feels that its population is being inadequately served then it actually HAS the moral imperative to fix that if it can. Now if it invests in infrastructure which it then operates itself or sells to a private entity and as a result improves the standards for its constituents it has done EXACTLY what it exists to do.

Wrong.. The federal government as well as the local government have given these companies monopolies specifically in order to support different townships. It is all regulated at a government level and these companies have published rates on file at their state public utilities commission.

Now, by fixing it, you are correct. It is the duty of the local governments to impose rules that fix the broken monopolies and force them to invest in new infrastructure is that is necessary. And when they do, there is usually a rider placed on the bills like when one city decides that all their utility lines must be moved under ground (which is becoming a common occurrence today). So the city, and/or townships (in my state, they are two different things) can and should fix the problems. They just don't need to have the government competing with an entity it already controls and taking the low hanging fruits and sticking those entities with the more expensive clients.

Imagine if you owned a business that sold gasoline. You have a cost you have to recover. Now imagine the city stepping in and underselling you and using tax payer funds in order to do so. But while the city is not subject to it's own taxes, you are and while the city doesn't have to jump through regulatory hoops, you do. So what would you think about the city all the sudden driving you out of business with tax payer funds?

Comment: Re:In other words... (Score 1) 334

by sumdumass (#47733955) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

Good start. Now, recall that the constitution granted power over navigable waterways, post offices,
and post roads, to the federal government. In other words, ALL telecommunication (known in
the eighteenth century) was to be managed by Congress, which can (and probably should)
defer details to one or more semiautonomous agencies: thus, the FCC.

Well, for the post offices and post roads, it specifically gives the federal government the ability or authority to create them but does not in any way give them the ultimate authority over all forms of them. If that was the case, the streets running to and from the post office and your house would be owned, maintained, and controlled by the federal government and not your local municipality or state government where applicable. Also, competitors to the post office wouldn't be around so FedEx, UPS, DHL and the likes would not be possible independent of the government.

As for waterways, that's actually an extraction of the interstate commerce clause and not specifically in the US constitution. I believe it was around 1824 when a conflict over licensing or registration requirements came into effect and the supreme court sided with the federal government due to the interstate commerce clause. So I'm not sure that is a real strong argument but I won't dispute it in practice.

But the big problem with all this is the semi-autonomous agencies or to be more precise, unelected political appointments not in the judicial branch but in agencies with the power to alter, create, and enforce and/or punish regulations which become laws or have the effect of laws instead of congress actually following the constitutionally provided method of creating federal laws.

Alas, Congress isn't totally clear in their guidance to the FCC (which is limited by the statutes that
created it), and the FCC has too much history to sort through, and too few options that can be swiftly
invoked. Getting the states to stop prohibiting telecommunications is very much in the
public interest, and isn't at all contrary to the Constitution.

It very much is contrary to the US Constitution. If congress has the power to act, then congress itself should act. What you are advocating for is a political appointee, independent of the US constitution and with the stroke of a pen, altering, removing, or negating state and local laws that it does not like and that you do not like without regard to any reason the state or local laws were put in place or the wished of the electorate within those jurisdictions.

If and as Congress clearly decides that e-mail (the kind of mail everyone uses nowadays)
is a 'post roads and post offices' function, they can bypass any state or even municipal
attempt to monopolize/throttle. It can also be treated as 'interstate commerce', which has
a good size body of settled law, of course, and also supports federal primacy.

If they so choose, then they should do so. The problem is, they are not doing so which is why the warning was made. It's basically saying what you do is not set in stone and can be undone just as easily so make sure you have good enough reasoning that any political appointee in the future would also support the move.

Comment: Re:Correction: (Score 1) 334

by sumdumass (#47733801) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

The republicans are voting against their best interest because they don't understand the issues and think they're making the smart choice.

Actually, they get to decide what their best interest is and it may not be what you want it to be. That is the problem with Freedom, there is always someone who thinks you are only free if you believe and think exactly as they do.

I'm betting they understand the issues better than you do and choose the sides they do specifically because of it. I know I do.

Comment: Re:did they... (Score 2) 82

by sumdumass (#47733123) Attached to: Researchers Hack Gmail With 92 Percent Success Rate

It likely would depending on the second factor.

This is basically a phishing attack. It only uses the meta data of the memory to prompt a fake logon screen around the time you would expect one. So lets say your second factor is your home wireless network ssid and if you are not on it, it asks for a second passphrase. If they can time a popup asking for it right after the fish your normal log on, you basically give it to them unless you notice it.

Comment: Re:Blast from the past (Score 4, Interesting) 82

by sumdumass (#47733075) Attached to: Researchers Hack Gmail With 92 Percent Success Rate

Corect me if i'm wrong.

In desktop and server os'the memory allocation is controlled by the os. So couldn't a solution be having the OS control direct memory acces and just present the ap with a table in order to mimic current practices and backwards compatability? Or would that be too much overhead for these devices?

Or am i way off base here?

Comment: Statistics. (Score 1) 412

by khasim (#47730621) Attached to: Tech Looks To Obama To Save Them From 'Just Sort of OK' US Workers

I agree. Even if what TFA says is true (it is not) then the US companies would be competing with companies around the world for those people. And their own governments.

Not to mention the ones who start their own companies and work for themselves.

Which would mean that those awesome programmers would have all the bargaining power. They wouldn't be accepting H-1B wages.

Statistically, there cannot be enough of "the best" to feed the stated demand for "the best".

But it makes sense if you substitute "cheaper" for "the best".

And that is reflected in the quality of the code being produced.

Comment: Re:Not smart (Score 1) 413

by sumdumass (#47730221) Attached to: 33 Months In Prison For Recording a Movie In a Theater

Nah.. its the same as always. Those who could actually use an automobile analogy always got modded up.

Its probably because people could actually understand and relate to the point but the line is more fuzzy than a corvette screaming by at 140mph (~225kph) while you are going slower than traffic in the fast lane.

Comment: Re:In other words... (Score 1) 334

by sumdumass (#47730053) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

Do you guys go to some seminar to get things so clearly wrong? The supremacy clause does not invalidate anything i said. It even specifically requires the acts of government to be in accourdance with the constitution in order to be the dupreme law if the land.

The supremacy clause does not in any way give the feds carte blache over the country.

Wow.. this is simple highschool civics. Even directly reading the supremacy clause would have given you a clue.

After an instrument has been assembled, extra components will be found on the bench.