gburt

Any chance you could point me to a reference? I'm doing research in this space and currently working on a paper which does exactly this for diagnostics of testing processes.

$30/ton CO2e in BC, in effect today: http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/tbs/tp/climate/A6.htm

Of course, that's probably not enough. See Greg Mankiw's "invitation to the Pigou club" where he discusses the research on the "correct" value (estimated at between $80 and $300 per ton): http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mankiw/files/smart_taxes.pd...

I would be eager to find an analysis of how Amex lost the Costco account. What a painful loss that must be...

>The most intersting fingerprinting vector I found on Tor Browser is getClientRects. Is strange that reading back from a canvas has been prevented but simply asking the browser javascript API how a specific DOM elements has been drawn on the screen has not been prevented or protected in any way.

This isn't as strange as he makes it sound, it is done to prevent the link color history attack [1]. Most of the other CSS properties aren't allowed on :active or :visited modifiers.

[1] http://dbaron.org/mozilla/visited-privacy

I think he meant the financial managers.

What does this mean (in laymen terms)?

No authentication. The only sort of authentication token is linearly predictable and printed in plain text on the outside of the car.

No rate limiting. They successfully used the linear nature to collect a list of valid VINs and validate them.

No apparent intrusion detection.

Bad response to security disclosure. They didn't fix the problem when it was reported, they still haven't addressed the researcher properly.

I'm not sure these are the right people to write life critical software (which admittedly, this vuln. does not appear to relate to life critical systems; just privacy and comfort).

This sounds like a bug - a business is not clearly safer or less safe a credit risk doing the movement described. Perhaps a business opportunity there.

That is awfully confident for someone cautious. I am much closer to 95% than 100%.

I'm glad you've got paying customers and absolutely do not wish to interfere with that. This might be a bit of a faux pas, but, it is good for the community: I developed some code to build a service like this back in 2012. It is released GPLv2 if anyone is interested: https://github.com/gburtini/Private-Plugin-Updater

If and only if you live near an Apple store. Otherwise you might be without your machine for a week or two during that period: that is a serious cost for many people in our profession.

From the perspective written in the article, I don't understand why the seller is portrayed as upset: they did the deal at a price they agreed upon. Just because another buyer came in "after" that had a better price changes nothing; this could happen in a non-assigned transaction too. This part, at least, is a natural part of the mechanism of price finding in the market.

It is an interesting question why the sellers are mispricing their homes by as much as 30%, but if you know anything about the Vancouver real estate market, it is perhaps not that surprising: numbers move very fast, a lot of inexperienced non-investors own property (that they have usually owned for a very long time) and have perhaps never been involved in a deal of such scale.

If I were the buyer in the first transaction, however, I'd be very upset with my real estate agent though: his job was to advise me, not to be my adversary in an internal negotiation. He did not act in my interest, despite representing himself as my agent. I would be promptly reviewing my real estate contract and the real estate laws in my province for words like "fiduciary duty" and given the size of the transaction, probably consulting a lawyer.

A stark reminder that real estate agents are not your friend -- and actually, that is true regardless of what side of the transaction you are on. They are almost always paid by the selling party and still even have non-aligned incentives even for that party: preferring to get a sale done quickly than to get a better price for their client (as they only earn a fraction of the increase, but there is a high fixed 'minimum' property price in any given jurisdiction; a second sale will do much better for them than a 5% increase in their current sale).

1.3% is a HUGE percentage of companies that have to make a 100mn "exit."

I don't buy it. I think being a disturbance is just much easier than one realizes.

Taxing consumption doesn't work unless it is somehow international.

Bad advice. And by advice I mean this is an ad.

Icons, but not text, can be language agnostic and probably more resilient to cultural variation. Obviously well-recognized icons like arrows fit this property more so than time and culturally dependent things like floppy disks for save buttons.

Almost every one of these criticisms I have seen of "self-driving cars" posit world situations that don't happen under the current regime despite nothing limiting them.

Why is this a problem unique to self-driving cars? Is it that it "won't" runover the counterparty? Have you ever even considered the idea of running over a thief? I suspect our legal infrastructure would not look kindly upon you in most jurisdictions.

Can you share some of the arguments in favor of involuntary unions? (I'm even willing to invest some time digging if anyone has some pointers to potential sources of literature, I am genuinely interested.)

My personal experience has been that when I've been the so-called "beneficiary" of one, it has not actually benefited me and has often made for awkward scenarios where there is me and the counterparty ("employer") and this weird semi-interested third-party regulating how we can interact, regardless of what is actually in my self-interest.

Just to be clear, I am all for collective bargaining in the sense of a bunch of (small) actors choosing to work together against an adversary. I would do this myself if I deemed it beneficial. I don't understand why we would mandate that individuals had to be bound by the agreement whether they want to participate or not. I recognize that this is a common structure though.

At those numbers, it could easily be seen as a price cut.

($1500/$30) = 50 months / 12 ~= 4.16 years. More than 4 years to break even, not including time-value of money.

---

Edit: The actual prices are probably closer to the actual turnover for people upgrading Photoshop.

($1500/$50) = 30 months / 12 = 2.5 years.

($1500/$75) = 20 months / 12 ~= 1.67 years.

Isn't this a pretty significant copyright infringement?

Also, a thought: if you have a huge amount of records in that table, they're probably transients or other cache material from a somewhat misbehaved plugin.

A way to "handle" that (other than the obvious and important technique of identifying and fix whatever is creating them) is to install an in-memory caching plugin that will store transients in RAM instead of in the database.

This is an ok angle for dealing with well-behaved (prefixed) plugins that are no longer in use.

Perhaps a better solution is to write a custom implementation of get_option (and update_option, etc. if you feel necessary) which logs uses -- run this temporarily and remove anything that hasn't been used in X days. I'd then go through and browse all the admin. pages by hand just to ensure something rare isn't missed.

In that case, "remove" should probably mean "copy to a different database" just in case it turns out it had value.

I took the same course @geedy is speaking of (with him, in fact) and there are two good comparable resources I'm aware of:

(1) Ramon's (excellent!) lecture notes themselves are currently (but not always) available on his website: https://people.ok.ubc.ca/rlawrenc/teaching/404/notes/index.h...

(2) Garcia-Molina, Ullman and Widom's book and courses taught on their work: http://www.amazon.ca/Database-System-Implementation-Hector-G... http://infolab.stanford.edu/~ullman/dbsi.html

You're not alone. I too, have no idea what it means. These things seem to teach a bunch of buzzwords and then maybe lecture about how cool Ruby is for a few days. It is sort of self-taught programmers turned ... not-self-taught.

My reaction time is 25 years worse than my actual age according to this. I am not particularly surprised although I question the variance in their methodology.

I'm not a lawyer and definitely not a lawyer in "almost everywhere", but it is surely illegal in almost everywhere with western-style property rights? Especially if it left residue after the fact. On the other hand, who is going to take this to court? These are largely one-off tourists who won't have a vested interest in the matter after tomorrow.

People are very possessive about the state of their car's exterior, imagine someone sticking one of these on a high end car.

Also, it sounds to me the area is not actually a "no parking" area - it is at least conceivable the court's interpretation would be different if the claim were true. Residents are painting the curbs themselves.

You are being unreasonable. The grandparent is correct. Any parker would've left in less than 5 minutes. You would not have even known they were there. If they did not leave and you needed out, you could have simply asked them to leave.

Property rights in this strange absolutist never-to-be-violated interpretation would make a hell of a world. Dropped your wallet? WELL, I CAN'T PICK IT UP FOR YOU BECAUSE THAT'S THEFT OF YOUR PROPERTY.

This effect is called the mammalian diving reflex: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammalian_diving_reflex

By the sounds of it he was standing at the sink in order to do this. That's not "resting" for the sake of a resting heart rate.

Edit: for instance, I just tested mine from sitting (at my desk) to standing beside my desk it increases 25 points, on the linked chart going from "athlete" to "below average."