“I use multi-factor authentication on every web site that I can – that way no one can track me.”Yeah, I am pretty sure that isn’t how that works, self-proclaimed cyber security ‘expert’ on a podcast
This is a bit of a departure from the tech-oriented articles that I usually post but I thought I would just “put this out there” because I couldn’t find any relevant info when I had this issue with this product.
Basically, the Jotul GV 370 DV is a gas stove (the kind you use to heat a room, not to cook on). It was installed and minimally tested for gas flow. The problem was, it wouldn’t stay lit when we tried to use it for the first time. The pattern was, the pilot would light, 30-90 seconds would go by, the stove would flash combust (the gas in the chamber would ignite) rather forcefully but not stay on. This cycle would continue until a red LED on the front of the control unit started flashing. At this point, I turned off the stove and turned of the gas and started looking for answers.
I read and re-read the installation docs that came with the Jotul GV 370 DV. One thing I noticed is that the damper setting on it was not correct for the amount of vent pipe that was installed. That was an easy fix. Unfortunately, it didn’t solve the problem (or change it at all). Internet searches didn’t reveal any additional useful information, just a couple of edge cases and people arguing philosophy rather than practice solutions.
I even tried the justAnswers web site. Paid $5 for a ‘trial membership’ and was connected to an absolutely useless ‘expert’ who just tried to read me the online posts I had found via google. His final bit of ‘expert advice’ was to get a voltage meter, disassemble the stove and tell him what all the voltage readings were on all the stove components. Absolutely pointless exercise. I thanked him for wasting my time and requested a refund from justAnswers.
At this point, I elected to take the glass off the front of the unit and inspect the burning media bed to make sure the gas jets weren’t blocked or obstructed. This is when I noticed that the gas bed was out of alignment with the pilot starter. I removed the gas bed tray, re-seated it so that the notch for the pilot was centered on the pilot (instead of all the way to the right like it was when i originally opened it up). After this adjustment, I carefully placed the gas bed media back on the pan, reassembled the glass and turned the gas back on.
When I turned on the stove, the pilot came on, 30 seconds later the perimeter of the bed lit, went out, re-lit, then stayed on. Success! All that because of a one centimeter misalignment of the gas bed with the pilot.
So there you have it. Hopefully this will help someone else who has this issue quickly solve the problem without delay or ‘expert’ help.
or Artificial Intelligence Bull Shitake
There are a lot of claims being made, and as this article points out, not many of them are supported by strong evidence/math.
In Rebooting AI, Ernie Davis and I made six recommendations, each geared towards how readers – and journalists â€“ and researchers might equally assess each new result that they achieve, asking the same set of questions in a limit section in the discussion of their papers:
Stripping away the rhetoric, what does the AI system actually do? Does a â€œreading systemâ€ really read?
How general is the result? (Could a driving system that works in Phoenix work as well in Mumbai? Would a Rubikâ€™s cube system work in opening bottles? How much retraining would be required?)
Is there a demo where interested readers can probe for themselves?
If AI system is allegedly better than humans, then which humans, and how much better? (A comparison is low wage workers with little incentive to do well may not truly probe the limits of human ability)
How far does succeeding at the particular task actually take us toward building genuine AI?
How robust is the system? Could it work just as well with other data sets, without massive amounts of retraining? AlphaGo works fine on a 19×19 board, but would need to be retrained to play on a rectangular board; the lack of transfer is telling.
Some Pi-based nerdiness/extreme creativity.
Interesting background on some interesting (and at times annoying) buzzwords in 2019.
So we have gone from conflict diamonds to conflict avocados? I guess it proves out the old adage “if something is worth doing, it is worth doing for money”. Sadly.
Automated processes and workflows aren’t AI, but everyone wants to be a ‘player’ in the Artificial Intelligence space.
As I recently observed, most ‘AI’ purveyors seem to have the attitude “You can’t buy AI, but I can sell it to you!”.
Constraints can be a good creative tension to help temper and refine innovation. Just don’t have ‘too many’ constraints.
This is the stuff of sci-fi starting to come to life. It will be interesting to see how this develops over time.
These types of articles seem to come down to the insatiable need for writers to sensationalize things that they don’t necessarily understand.
For example, in the scenario outlined in the article, it is unlikely that the ‘AI’ (aka computer algorithm) was self aware and said to itself “hey, I have a comprehensive understanding of humans and their capabilities, so I will modify myself to ‘cheat’ at this task in a way that a human would find difficult to detect”.
More likely is that the algorithm was poorly defined and the brute force computational model (aka ‘AI’) found a way to ‘solve’ the problem in a way that wasn’t contemplated by the software developer.
Here is to a better 2019!
I knew that flickr has been on the decline for a while.Â IMHO, Yahoo’s acquisition was the beginning of the end.Â SmugMug’s heavy handed idiocy of late was the last straw for me.
After a few arrogant email demands from SmarmMug, I had had enough so I requested all of my data from flickr and it only took them a week and a half to provide the requested files.Â I happily downloaded my content and deleted my account after 13 years of use.
There is a well worn axiom in business that ‘data should be treated as a corporate asset’.Â This is, of course, very true and the advances in data science and ‘big data’ are giving the potential for that data to become even more valuable.
This got me thinking about how personal data should be thought about in the same way.Â Think about all the data generated from what you watch, what you listen to, where you visit, what you review, data from wearables, etc.Â All of this data is consumed and analyzed by 3rd parties currently, but what if individuals were able to take control of, what is, after all, their data.
Would this give rise to data science companies marketing algorithms directly to consumers (much like pharmaceutical companies market drugs directly)?Â Could it also give rise to the equivalent ‘data quackery’ similar to the natural supplements and homeopathic industry?Â That is, junk algorithms that, at their most benign, do no harm and at their worst incent you to dangerous courses of action?
Would there also be a new industry for ‘personal data scientists’ (like financial councilors or tax advisers) that would help you assess all of the data assets you have and how to best combine or leverage them with third parties to your best benefit (and not just the benefit of 3rd parties)?Â Wouldn’t it be great to have some control over the hundreds of arbitrage-like transactions that go on behind the scenes when you are waiting for a page to load on a commercial web site via browser setting that allow you to control what information about you gets shared (and with companies).
For me, RSS never really went away, as as my Feedly app convincingly proves.
Not one of the stronger PopSci articles I have seen. The ‘forensics’ consist mainly of ‘look closely at the image and think about it’. Em, ok.
Oh, and, warning, there is about 20x more auto-start ads and video on the linked page than there is actual useful content.
Microservices Need Architects – An excellent article on the complexity of something with ‘micro’ in it’s name. And, yes, I know and I am here to help with over a decade of experience in service design and enterprise integration skills.
For the past two years, microservices have been taking the software development world by storm. Their use has been popularized by organizations adopting Agile Software Development, continuous delivery and DevOps, as a logical next step in the progression to remove bottlenecks that slow down software delivery. As a result, much of the public discussion on microservices is coming from software developers who feel liberated by the chance to code without the constraints and dependencies of a monolithic application structure. While this “inside the microservice” perspective is important and compelling for the developer community, there are a number of other important areas of microservice architecture that aren’t getting enough attention.
Specifically, as the number of microservices in an organization grows linearly, this new collection of services forms an unbounded system whose complexity threatens to increase exponentially. This complexity introduces problems with security, visibility, testability, and service discoverability. However, many developers currently treat these as “operational issues” and leave them for someone else to fix downstream. If addressed up frontâ€”when the software system is being designedâ€”these aspects can be handled more effectively. Likewise, although there is discussion on techniques to define service boundaries and on the linkage between organizational structure and software composition, these areas can also benefit from an architectural approach. So, where are the architects?
Happy New Year!
Looking forward to a healthy, safe and prosperous 2017.