Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Here it comes (Score 1) 38

People forget that the primary concerns about Kessler Syndrome were about geosynchronous orbit, which used to be where all the most important satellites went (many of course still go there, but not the megaconstellations). It takes a long, long time for debris to leave GEO. But LEO is a very different beast.

It's almost like the orbital shells will clear up in a day or two, and internet service won't be interrupted at all. In fact, we ought to purposely make satellites run into each other, for entertainment. 8^)

Yes, Geosynchronous Kessler would be a real tragedy. Yes, lower orbital shells will tend to have the resulting debris de-orbit more quickly.

But lost in all of this is the fact that if people are getting their pR0n from Starlink or the upcoming competitors, even a wildly optimistic 1 year downtime will be a real problem. Seems the disagreement effect running rampant on Slashdot is out in full force.

Comment Re:Here it comes (Score 1) 38

Some researchers do think we are actually pretty close to a kessler event from musks increasingly rampant space polution.

With that said, if it happens, it wont be long term. The LEO orbit they take means the sky will mostly clear up in well under a decade with most of the debris having deorbited in around 5 years.

I wont even speculate on the sort of havok Elon musks fantastical and unlikely space datacenters would create.

The results of the inevitable Kessler event on debris orbiting shells won't be completely predictable. Angle of strike, relative velocity of striking objects.

Some debris might take more time to de-orbit. let's not forget that Elmo isn't the only one contributing to the coming fireworks. Even without a Kessler event, it's going to get interesting navigating through LEO.

And orbiting data centers? From a strategic POV, I would encourage adversarial countries to put their entire countries data in LEO. All of it. hellava thing to try to defend.

The irony is that defending the Data center will likely create a Kessler event.

Comment Re:Not me (Score 0) 55

As a consumer brand, yes, their support is great. You are also paying a premium for Apple products compared to a $400 white-box laptop.

As a business customer, their support sucks.

I've used Apple products professionally since the 1990's. Using it professionally today.

So your claim fails utterly. What's your next excuse? I'm sure you have one

So hey, we must remember this is the 2020's, where you can have your own personal truth!

Comment Re:Manus (Score 1) 33

The ones I have been in don't talk anything like that. And I've been in many.

Not that many apparently.

Good to know.

They talk like that in the board room, they talk like that when it's 2 CEOs out for a drink (and you got drug along, since you're the Chief Engineer), and they talk that way when they're just shooting the shit.

Good to know

Hanging out with groups of executives in Vegas during conventions leads me to want to fucking kill myself. It's not human conversation. It's weird cosplaying.

Are you sure they avoid dropping to normal human speech because you are there? Seriously dude, you're a pill.

The different scopes involve different speaking terms, those with a military bent have one set of recurring terms. Technology based boards, another. Marketing yet another, along with fiduciary involved boards. Some of the groups I have been in have significant overlap.

Board of directors. You're crossing boards and groups, and it has confused you.

Exactly who do you think is on those boards? It's not the guys in the stockroom. A meeting might have some Adimirals/Generals, Industry CEOs Educational directors, oftentimes a smattering of Division heads. Presentations, might be from Division heads, Engineers, accountants.

But that's not the point of "Boards and groups". The point is that all groups have grouptalk. Engineers and programmers have all manner of it, usually a lot of Acronyms and Initialisms. Accountants, Military, politicians. The same with the C-Suite. But you have to be able to drop to "normal" speech.

Once you have been in a field, you end up getting used to the terms used, and they are logical.

Bullshit.

"Manus is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." Now that is bullshit. And if someone said that in a board I'm on,, I'd tell them it was bullshit.

And if you said that to the person who said it in the board of directors that I sit on, that would be the last thing you ever said in it, and subsequently, that position.

Perhaps my BODs and CEO positions are unique, along with every person on them. And it sounds like those you have sat on are dishonest, and probably doomed to failure. I've called out things before, from polite disagreement, maybe asking for clarification in English, to telling the person they are full of shit. Haven't been fired or removed just yet. Some spouting bullshit have.

We can and do drop to CEOspeak if you want to call it that, but that is only public facing.

Now if someone comes into a meeting and claims their product "is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." They'll be asked to define what an action engine is, if their company is part of actionengine.com (might want to make certain you aren't infringing here Manus) What manner of questions does their product answer, what are the "tasks" it executes, what workflows it automates, and what does human reach mean. Is it physical, or metaphorical.

Point is someone who comes in like that will find out quickly they might as well explain themselves in plain English, or else be grilled to discomfort and understanding they were wasting valuable time.

What boards have you served on to gain that unassailable knowledge?

Board of Directors for a medium sized LLC, and smaller LLCs that we acquired before dissolving.

Seems like your experience was rather limited compared to mine. For my part, as CEO of two successful corporations, Vice CEO of another, and sitting on five advisory boards and Boards of Directors, I've been around a bit. For my CEO work, People weren't allowed to spew bullshit like "Manus is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." They would be stopped - usually kindly reminded that there were all manner of disciplines here, so simple English would be appreciated. They don't get upbraided unless they persist.

Engineers using acronyms and initialisms are asked to define them the first time, then they can drop to the terms for expediency (that should be done regardless, reference Engineering presentation 101) Anyhow, you do you, I'll do me. And as my boss once told someone who was trying to bullshit me "Probably not a good thing to do that - never bullshit a bullshitter"

Comment Re:It points to AI slop code (Score 0) 49

No surprise this idiocy is happening in other areas too. There is a special kind of mental disability you need to have (or acquire) to be an economics graduate: A total inability to see more than a few months into the future and a total inability to do any kind of risk management. It worked? Everything must be more than fine and surely we can do it cheaper, right?

That is why people with critical institutional and technological skills are not treated even remotely at their value, let alone critical for organizational survival. Tech history is full of big names that are not around anymore or only in massively reduced forms. And in most cases, it is because some "managers" did not manage to think.

Beancounter think. Yes, you can increase profits for the quarter if you gut the place. We were taken over by the bean counters where I retired from.

What was once an accounting office with 3 people, ended up becoming the largest group in the place. They gutted overhead, sucking it all up to pay themselves. I was mandated to travel to conferences at least once every other year. I couldn't perform the mandate, because there was no more overhead money.

Crazy thing was, my mandate didn't go away. I asked how the bloody hell I was supposed to do that. Boss mumbled something about taking quizzes online.

I forced the issue be during the self analysis part of the yearly review, that I had not perform a mandated activity for three years, and should be terminated for refusing direct orders. Gosh did they have to do a tap-dance.

So the bean counters pretty much destroyed the place. new innovations were not implemented, and we were falling behind. Meanwhile, they embedded a bean counter within each group, and were still agitating for more. I made a joke that we were going to have a 6 figure accountant hired to keep track of 5000 dollars of pencils. And then....

At the same time I was personally performing our groups finances and credit cards.

Comment Re:Not me (Score 2) 55

According to Jonathan Rotenberg, "People want to hate Apple, because it is big and powerful. But Apple has an underlying moral purpose that is immensely deep and expansive..."

Not me. I hate Apple for entirely personal reasons. I've supported Apple products professionally for 28 years. Apple sucks. Their corporate sales policies suck. Their support sucks compared to other major PC vendors. Their device security sucks. (Realistically, their device security is pretty decent, but it makes it dramatically harder for me to keep them in good working condition.)

Wanna know how badly Apple sucked? I had a Magic Mouse go dead. I got on the phone with Cupertino. After convincing them it was a legitimate defect,at 5 p.M, they had one at my doorstep at 9 the next morning - California to PA. Their only request was to send the old one back prepaid so they could do a postmortem.

I had a bluetooth problem with my headphones. I'm rather deaf. After posting on their support section, I got an unexpected phone call in 15 minutes. I dunno if text sent an alert, but one of their support people hopped on that, and we fixed it pronto.

They prepaid my trade in of an Intel iMac for a new M4 Mac, and I got several hundred dollars trade in.

I always like to contrast Apples worst in class support with me having a in warranty problem with my kid's laptop a few years ago. (forget the brand) The "service desk" handed me a Xerox copy for me to walk the whole way through it.

Sucks to own a Mac.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 0) 55

Doesn't excuse Jobs being an asshole, though.

There is a bit of a different mindset/skillset involved in CEO or visionary work. And a lot of people seem to think anyone could do it. Like the one guy who said a marketing person could do what Jobs did.

No, they can't. A person with the proper mindset and vision can market if they have the ability. But the bog-standard marketeer can't.

And a person with vision can be a bit testy to be around. I've been CEO of two corporations. You work your ass off, despite the memes. You have to deal with people who challenge everything - which is okay, except when the challenges aren't all that clever. And you are called an asshole. By people who believe that worth is inversely proportional to position. You deal with it.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 2) 55

"He wasn't a product guy, and you need a product not just raw tech to sell. Selling stuff being somewhat important for a company."

Check out Clive Sinclair - he was an engineer and did pretty damn well selling his computers in the UK. Maybe Woz couldn't have done that, but it doesn't mean Jobs was the one required to help him, any competenant marketing type could have done the same. Vew few people could have designed the hardware and software that Woz did at the time.

I hate to disagree, but there is a huge difference between conceptualization and marketing. But you realize you are saying that Apple would be where it is at today with a marketing person as CEO.

Marketing people might be able to sell refrigerators to inuits, but someone needs to come up with concept and direction. I've been involved with marketeers for a long time. They pitch products, not conceptualize, design or built them.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 1) 55

Jobs gets all the accolades and fame but he was just a pushy sociopath in a suit,

Suit? The guy who famously wore a black turtleneck all the time?

Anyhoo. I think people outside tech overestimate the importance of CEOs and people in tech underestimate it.

So much this.

While it doesn't fit the standard Slashdot meme of the CEO as worthless psychopath, there is a value, and an ability that goes with the work. Being a CEO in two organizations, and now interacting with them in my present position, I have to say I work my ass off to keep things running. I get called asshole at times, and sometimes people have to just trust me - it's my career on the line - but it isn't the fever dream people have about the position.

Without Jobs, Woz probably would have been a really great engineer in some company and you'd never have heard of him at all. He wasn't a product guy, and you need a product not just raw tech to sell. Selling stuff being somewhat important for a company.

Steve Jobs also had a functioning reality distortion field, something not all that many people have and that's really important for building a company...

Also this. Wozniak was Wozniak. And Jobs was Jobs. They had an important synergy. But without Jobs, Woz would almost certainly be as you described.

Comment Re:It points to AI slop code (Score 1) 49

There may be a tipping point where the proverbial shit hits the fan, and there is no competent person to look at it, analyze it, or fix it. What now, Saint Peter?

I believe there was a documentary predicting this exact scenario? Stupido, Dumb and Dumber, Idiocracy? Something like that.

What we need are the programmers from the 70s, 80s and 90s that went into those cryo-sleep chambers to wake up and rearchitect these codebases from scratch in Assembly and C.

I'm in a similar field. RF. We are in a time whereThe RF spectrum is about as clogged as it can get, teetering on the edge of becoming a train wreck. Yet people who know the nuances of keeping signals away from each other are becoming rare.

We had this weird dichotomy of people thinking "Radio is obsolete - if you are technical minded, go for digital technology and science!" while forgetting that a cellular phone is a little walkie-talkie, bluetooth is GHz band transmission, and so on. And we forget that our computers themselves are unintended RF generators. RF is an unruly beast. Its characteristics vary by frequency, time of day, even by weather.

People who understand how to keep this stuff working are not common any more. And we aren't being replaced nearly fast enough. Think of it like the COBOL problem. Old dudes and dudettes naming their price to come back to the banks and keep things running. Except physics based - seemingly arcane. I'm naming my price too, Some folks have told me I should grow my beard long, wear a pointy black hat and gown, and carry a wand. Plunk my magic twanger and the problem is fixed. Because to many, what I do seems like Magic. A good thing I like what I'm doing.

Comment Re:Nope. Server hardware runs both very well. (Score 1) 186

LOL. As if Linux doesn't rename things, change folders, etc. Or even worse you change bistro and its all different.

Can you tell me where Linux does that? I've been using Linux constantly since around 2007, and that has not happened once. And not certain where you get the idea that changing a "bistro" changes everything on the computer.

Did you get your Linux knowledge from the local Windows OS club?

But what does a Distro within itself change? What file gets put in another place, what gets renamed? What can't you find today that you could yesterday? Yes, if you switch back and forth between Distros, it can happen, but my point is that Windows 11, the same operating system, arbitrarily alters things.

I've been using Linux since around 1994. Even in the same family things diverge, Ubuntu and Debian for example.

Comment Re:Nope. Server hardware runs both very well. (Score -1, Troll) 186

LOL. As if Linux doesn't rename things, change folders, etc. Or even worse you change bistro and its all different.

Can you tell me where Linux does that? I've been using Linux constantly since around 2007, and that has not happened once. And not certain where you get the idea that changing a "bistro" changes everything on the computer.

Did you get your Linux knowledge from the local Windows OS club?

Comment Re:Windows is crashing because? (Score 1) 186

My Macs get pushed pretty hard

There's a big difference between pushing a PC hard doing general stuff, and pushing a PC hard gaming. The latter is a true clusterfuck of cludges and workarounds, often with kernel level dumbfuckery in the name of beating cheaters and pirates all while using shoddy rushed out drivers that are poorly tested for one of the most complex subsystems in the OS (graphics).

It's orders of magnitude easier to crash a system with a game than it is with literally any other workload. That's not to say that Windows is reliable. It's objectively not, but the OP does have a big point. I can say with confidence that 100% of the crashes I've had on my PC have been due to gaming and the occasional really poorly written AI load (still GPU driver related).

My son who is a gamer, and I built a top end gaming system, and I concur. Reminded me of the "good old days", where just getting the damn computer to work was something to celebrate, and never turn the thing off once you do, at least until the next BSOD. It's a pretty thing, but a definite learning experience

Slashdot Top Deals

"When anyone says `theoretically,' they really mean `not really.'" -- David Parnas

Working...