Slashdot Mirror

http://this.deakin.edu.au/cult...

This seems like the kind of thing that should have been a chapter in Doctorow's "Car Wars" short story.

the robot arm style i am talking about are in the style of http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/stories/2011/11/21/the-next-generation-of-flight-simulation

That gets modded informative? A note to the wise moderator: "Informative" presupposes the contribution of information. Whereas what we have here amounts to an authoritative-sounding chin-jutting, "Is Not!" with nothing of any material to back it up. Children argue like this, and it should be pointed out that an adult who argues like this is likely to maintain other over-simplified thought patterns which will naturally extend to their belief systems.

No it's the wrong kind of mercury. It is NOT the same stuff that comes in thermometers.

Metallic Mercury doesn't dissolve in water and is not useful in pharmaceuticals, so it is bonded into an organic molecule, C9H9HgNaO2S, (Thiomersal), which metabolizes in the human body into C2H5ClHg (Ethyl Mercury). Ethyl Mercury, however, is indeed toxic.

# Very toxic by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed.
# Danger of cumulative effects.
# Very toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment.

-FL

Political Correctness stifles free speech also.

There's a very good reason they are called schools of learning and not schools of thinking.
Here is the Inclusive language guidelines for Deakin University. In just one generation PC has gone from the butt of derisive jokes in the seventies to a mechanism that criminalises thought. One generation is all it took which goes to show that the product that these gentleman peddle is without doubt the worlds most dangerous.

Hmm. I've thought about this before. I don't know how difficult this should be. In my (long) past experience with graphing and charting software, this amounts to at least two separate problems. The first and easiest is the drawing library - the pure graphics capability. The second, hardest, most complicated and usually least well done part is the interface and presentation capability. In other words, it's easy to draw a pie chart. Making it pretty, providing enough feature variety (but not too much), and making it easy to use is hard. A classic "90% rule of software" problem. But there should be some good libraries (based on OpenGL?) that provide the charting tools. So many scientific disciplines have their own unique preferred ways of charting their data!

A link or two, for whomever else might be reading this:
Graphical Data Presentation, Chapter 12 of an online text, Introduction to Data Collection and Analysis by Albert Goodman, provides a short overview of the basics of charting. I only glanced at it but it seems to be well written.

Edward Tufte's Visual Display of Quantitative Information is widely regarded as the most respected book on graphic presentation of data. He conducts workshops around the country. Tufte's Poster page has a pic of the "Napoleon's March" map by Charles J Minard, a triumph of multivariate data representation.

Tufte also provides a forum on data presentation. This multi-year thread discusses dozens of free, open source and commercial graphing tools. He has also published an essay on The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint (or lack thereof). It's not available for free, so here's a synopsis and a review.

Hmm. I've thought about this before. I don't know how difficult this should be. In my (long) past experience with graphing and charting software, this amounts to at least two separate problems. The first and easiest is the drawing library - the pure graphics capability. The second, hardest, most complicated and usually least well done part is the interface and presentation capability. In other words, it's easy to draw a pie chart. Making it pretty, providing enough feature variety (but not too much), and making it easy to use is hard. A classic "90% rule of software" problem. But there should be some good libraries (based on OpenGL?) that provide the charting tools. So many scientific disciplines have their own unique preferred ways of charting their data!

A link or two, for whomever else might be reading this:
Graphical Data Presentation, Chapter 12 of an online text, Introduction to Data Collection and Analysis by Albert Goodman, provides a short overview of the basics of charting. I only glanced at it but it seems to be well written.

Edward Tufte's Visual Display of Quantitative Information is widely regarded as the most respected book on graphic presentation of data. He conducts workshops around the country. Tufte's Poster page has a pic of the "Napoleon's March" map by Charles J Minard, a triumph of multivariate data representation.

Tufte also provides a forum on data presentation. This multi-year thread discusses dozens of free, open source and commercial graphing tools. He has also published an essay on The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint (or lack thereof). It's not available for free, so here's a synopsis and a review.

Hmm. I've thought about this before. I don't know how difficult this should be. In my (long) past experience with graphing and charting software, this amounts to at least two separate problems. The first and easiest is the drawing library - the pure graphics capability. The second, hardest, most complicated and usually least well done part is the interface and presentation capability. In other words, it's easy to draw a pie chart. Making it pretty, providing enough feature variety (but not too much), and making it easy to use is hard. A classic "90% rule of software" problem. But there should be some good libraries (based on OpenGL?) that provide the charting tools. So many scientific disciplines have their own unique preferred ways of charting their data!

A link or two, for whomever else might be reading this:
Graphical Data Presentation, Chapter 12 of an online text, Introduction to Data Collection and Analysis by Albert Goodman, provides a short overview of the basics of charting. I only glanced at it but it seems to be well written.

Edward Tufte's Visual Display of Quantitative Information is widely regarded as the most respected book on graphic presentation of data. He conducts workshops around the country. Tufte's Poster page has a pic of the "Napoleon's March" map by Charles J Minard, a triumph of multivariate data representation.

Tufte also provides a forum on data presentation. This multi-year thread discusses dozens of free, open source and commercial graphing tools. He has also published an essay on The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint (or lack thereof). It's not available for free, so here's a synopsis and a review.

You can trust mainstream media such as Forbes (and Slashduh) to be brain-damaged as well.

"But some brain-damaged people can't comprehend sarcasm, and Israeli researchers think it's because a specific brain region has gone dark. [...]
"People with prefrontal brain damage suffer from difficulties in understanding other people's mental states, and they lack empathy," said study co-author Simone Shamay-Tsoory, a researcher at the University of Haifa. "

DUH!

We've known this at least since Phineas Gage's unfortunate accident with a tamping iron in 1848.

Given that we're talking about work by Shamay-Tsoory, a quick PubMed search says that the identified area is probably somewhere in the right ventromedial prefrontal lobe. That it can be identified by testing e.g. comprehension of sarcasm naturally gets twisted by Forbes/Slashduh, so now it looks like we've got a special Sarcasm Organ.

"Breaking news: Them science guys find out that our breathing is handled by large saccular organs in the thoracic cavity. They're calling 'em "lungs" in medical mumbo-jumbo."

Gerald Edelman, nobel laureate, and author of a series of books on human consciousness, is the only author I've read who has openly stated he has defined consciousness. His book Bright Air, Brilliant Fire is a summary of his previous findings. Antonio Domasio has studied consciousness for decades. His earlier work Descartes' Error : Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain is a good jumping off point, especially as he starts off with a recounting of the case of Phineas Gage, a patient whose case was key to studies of the brain by way of studying brain injuries. Damasio's other book, The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness should be of interest to those studying AI, as the book takes a close look at the issue of emotion/feeling in decision making. It takes note of interesting cases where damage to areas of the brain leave patients able to reason clearly but unable to arrive at decisions as their emotional centres are impaired.Calvin Williams is worth a read, recently he published A Brief History of the Mind: From Apes to Intellect and Beyond which makes for a quick, easy read and an intro to his ideas. Generally the best and the brightest still view consciousness as an enigma but much has been accomplished in unraveling the mystery. Perhaps the most telling point is that neuroscience has taken the lead and the philosphers now follow in their footsteps.

html
html
text and ps
pdf

I don't believe Gage suffered any damage to his CC. I was always told the damage was centralised on his left frontal lobe, but this webpage talks about a variety of possible damage scenarios.

"Linux wil run on most, if not all desktop computers currently running Windows."

In fact, Linux runs on about 23 additional architectures that Microsoft can't even remotely support with their most-flexible embedded target.

• Diverse PDA / embedded / microcontroller / router devices:
  • Advanced RISC Machines, Ltd. ARM family (StrongARM SA-1110, XScale, ARM6, ARM7, ARM2, ARM250, ARM3i, ARM610, ARM710, ARM720T, and ARM920T)
  • Analog Devices, Inc.'s Blackfin DSP
  • Axis Communications ETRAX series ("CRIS" = Code Reduced Instruction Set RISC architecture)
  • Elan SC520 and SC300
  • Fujitsu FR-V
  • Hitachi H8 series
  • Intel i960
  • Intel IA32-compatibles (Cyrix MediaGX, STMicroelectronics STPC, ZF Micro ZFx86)
  • Matsushita AM3x
  • MIPS-compatibles (Toshiba TMPRxxxx / TXnnnn, NEC VR series, Realtek 8181)
  • Motorola 680x0-based machines (Motorola VMEbus boards, ISICAD Prisma machines, and Motorola Dragonball & ColdFire CPUs, and Cisco 2500/3000/4000 series routers)
  • Motorola embedded PowerPC (including MPC / PowerQUICC I, II, III families)
  • NEC V850E
  • Renesas Technology (formerly Hitachi) SH3/SH4 (SuperH: link1 link2)
  • Samsung CalmRISC
  • Texas Instruments's DM64x and C54x DSP families
• Intel 8086 / 80286 .
• Intel IA32 family: i386, i486, Pentium, Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Pentium III, Xeon, and Pentium IV processors, as well as IA32 clones from AMD, Cyrix, VIA, IDT, Winchip, NexGen, Transmeta, VIA C3 Ezra "CentaurHauls", and others.
• Intel/HP IA64: Trillian/Itanium/Itanium2
• AMD x86-64 Hammer family (including AMD Opteron)
• Motorola 68020-68040 series (with MMU): m68k Mac, Amiga, Atari ST/TT/Medusa/Falcon, HP/Apollo Domain, HP9000/300, sun3, and Sinclair Q40.
• Motorola/IBM PowerPC family: Most PowerMac (including G3/G4/G5) / CHRP / PReP / POP, Amiga PowerUP System, and IBM PPC64 (AS/400, RS/6000).
• MIPS

They're called the Borda and Single Transferrable Vote systems. Take a gander: http://www.deakin.edu.au/fac_buslaw/sch_aef/public ations/wp/wp2201.pdf

One of the last men we hanged, James Hanratty, was proved innocent in 1996. While this doesn't sound particularly important politically, as it was so much later, it re-ignited the death penalty debate in this country a fair bit.

See also here.

If this is supposed to be a joke, I think he forgot to add the humor. If it is supposed to be for-real, why not throw in some more devices that really have nothing to do with each other... say a pacemaker, a microwave oven, or, like, the wheel?

> Hollywood has a real problem with doing accurate explosions.

And aerodynamics. And astrophysics. And OSes . And science in general.

And don't even get me started on martial arts flicks.

You're right, Deakin doesn't offer this degree any more. Shortly after I left the Uni (in fact I think it occurred in 95 after my wife graduated) they changed the Aquatic Science course list to include S318, S337 and S338. And it looks like they are shuffling the courses again.

When I did my degree we had a choice of doing Aqu Biol, Aqu Chem, Aqu Biol/Chem (double minor), Aqu Biol/Comp Sci or Aqu Chem/Comp Sci. If you elected to do a double minor (as I did) you did first year (standard for everyone no matter which path you took) and then the remainder of your units were split 50:50 between the two minors.

The year behind my level they stopped offering the Comp Sci portion because there were only two of us doing it at my level. To accomodate this the Comp Sci was done in conjunction with the Faculty of Business and Management.

I don't remember what the various units were that I did but I do remember Aqu. Ecology, Aqu Zoology, Aquaculture, Fisheries Management and Project (IBT). I haven't looked at my degree/results for almost 10 years. I have no need to.

I really don't care if you don't believe me. It's completely irrelevant to the entire thread of this discussion. Attacking the person, or their credentials, is a pretty weak way of supporting your argument. You continually tell me to "educate" myself but the best I have seen from you, with respect to research of any kind, is some links to extremely weak articles (Evolution is a fact because most biologist accept it as so) and of course there's your looking for information on a 10 year old course matter on a current web site.

You're right, Deakin doesn't offer this degree any more. Shortly after I left the Uni (in fact I think it occurred in 95 after my wife graduated) they changed the Aquatic Science course list to include S318, S337 and S338. And it looks like they are shuffling the courses again.

When I did my degree we had a choice of doing Aqu Biol, Aqu Chem, Aqu Biol/Chem (double minor), Aqu Biol/Comp Sci or Aqu Chem/Comp Sci. If you elected to do a double minor (as I did) you did first year (standard for everyone no matter which path you took) and then the remainder of your units were split 50:50 between the two minors.

The year behind my level they stopped offering the Comp Sci portion because there were only two of us doing it at my level. To accomodate this the Comp Sci was done in conjunction with the Faculty of Business and Management.

I don't remember what the various units were that I did but I do remember Aqu. Ecology, Aqu Zoology, Aquaculture, Fisheries Management and Project (IBT). I haven't looked at my degree/results for almost 10 years. I have no need to.

I really don't care if you don't believe me. It's completely irrelevant to the entire thread of this discussion. Attacking the person, or their credentials, is a pretty weak way of supporting your argument. You continually tell me to "educate" myself but the best I have seen from you, with respect to research of any kind, is some links to extremely weak articles (Evolution is a fact because most biologist accept it as so) and of course there's your looking for information on a 10 year old course matter on a current web site.

You're right, Deakin doesn't offer this degree any more. Shortly after I left the Uni (in fact I think it occurred in 95 after my wife graduated) they changed the Aquatic Science course list to include S318, S337 and S338. And it looks like they are shuffling the courses again.

When I did my degree we had a choice of doing Aqu Biol, Aqu Chem, Aqu Biol/Chem (double minor), Aqu Biol/Comp Sci or Aqu Chem/Comp Sci. If you elected to do a double minor (as I did) you did first year (standard for everyone no matter which path you took) and then the remainder of your units were split 50:50 between the two minors.

The year behind my level they stopped offering the Comp Sci portion because there were only two of us doing it at my level. To accomodate this the Comp Sci was done in conjunction with the Faculty of Business and Management.

I don't remember what the various units were that I did but I do remember Aqu. Ecology, Aqu Zoology, Aquaculture, Fisheries Management and Project (IBT). I haven't looked at my degree/results for almost 10 years. I have no need to.

I really don't care if you don't believe me. It's completely irrelevant to the entire thread of this discussion. Attacking the person, or their credentials, is a pretty weak way of supporting your argument. You continually tell me to "educate" myself but the best I have seen from you, with respect to research of any kind, is some links to extremely weak articles (Evolution is a fact because most biologist accept it as so) and of course there's your looking for information on a 10 year old course matter on a current web site.

Oh, by the way, I found this particularly amusing...

When I did my Biology degree (10 years ago)

Suddenly becomes

B. Sc Aqu. Sci. (Aqu Biol/Comp Sci). Graduated 1994 - Deakin University

Deakin University doesn't offer this unusual degree. Perhaps they did 10 years ago, but today the closest they offer is Bachelor of Science minoring in Computer Science.

If you look at the coursework for B Sc (Comp Sci) then we can eliminate the biology major, the chemistry major, the earth science major, because these majors don't offer courses in aquatic science.

My best guess is you did the Environmental Science major . This offers at best three biology courses, each course lasting only a single semester within the 3 year degree.

Now if you wanted to do an actual degreee in Biology you'd need to do a Bachelor of Science (Biological Science). This is offered by The Biology and Chemistry Department, not the School of Ecology and Environment.

Now while it's certainly possible that the degrees and departments have shuffled in 10 years, I'm also willing to entertain the possibility that you exaggerated your credentials when you claimed you had a biology degree. I am certainly not belittling your degree - it's hard work and I congratulate you - but I'd like to know whether you truly did a biology degree, or if you did a biology course or two.

Oh, by the way, I found this particularly amusing...

When I did my Biology degree (10 years ago)

Suddenly becomes

B. Sc Aqu. Sci. (Aqu Biol/Comp Sci). Graduated 1994 - Deakin University

Deakin University doesn't offer this unusual degree. Perhaps they did 10 years ago, but today the closest they offer is Bachelor of Science minoring in Computer Science.

If you look at the coursework for B Sc (Comp Sci) then we can eliminate the biology major, the chemistry major, the earth science major, because these majors don't offer courses in aquatic science.

My best guess is you did the Environmental Science major . This offers at best three biology courses, each course lasting only a single semester within the 3 year degree.

Now if you wanted to do an actual degreee in Biology you'd need to do a Bachelor of Science (Biological Science). This is offered by The Biology and Chemistry Department, not the School of Ecology and Environment.

Now while it's certainly possible that the degrees and departments have shuffled in 10 years, I'm also willing to entertain the possibility that you exaggerated your credentials when you claimed you had a biology degree. I am certainly not belittling your degree - it's hard work and I congratulate you - but I'd like to know whether you truly did a biology degree, or if you did a biology course or two.

Oh, by the way, I found this particularly amusing...

When I did my Biology degree (10 years ago)

Suddenly becomes

B. Sc Aqu. Sci. (Aqu Biol/Comp Sci). Graduated 1994 - Deakin University

Deakin University doesn't offer this unusual degree. Perhaps they did 10 years ago, but today the closest they offer is Bachelor of Science minoring in Computer Science.

If you look at the coursework for B Sc (Comp Sci) then we can eliminate the biology major, the chemistry major, the earth science major, because these majors don't offer courses in aquatic science.

My best guess is you did the Environmental Science major . This offers at best three biology courses, each course lasting only a single semester within the 3 year degree.

Now if you wanted to do an actual degreee in Biology you'd need to do a Bachelor of Science (Biological Science). This is offered by The Biology and Chemistry Department, not the School of Ecology and Environment.

Now while it's certainly possible that the degrees and departments have shuffled in 10 years, I'm also willing to entertain the possibility that you exaggerated your credentials when you claimed you had a biology degree. I am certainly not belittling your degree - it's hard work and I congratulate you - but I'd like to know whether you truly did a biology degree, or if you did a biology course or two.

Team: Matt and Ben
Start time: 2.30pm Thursday
Finish Time: 5.30pm Friday
University: Deakin University (yes that meams the story has a spelling error but it was deliberate because /. is US centric and US editors pick the stories)
Coffees: Matt ~12, Ben ~9
Ciggie breaks (5 mins): Matt ~15, Ben N/A
Final URLs: Private (you don't really need them, and I don't particularly wanna hear troll comments on our code)
Accidental Walk-ins into the wrong computer lab due to lack of sleep: Matt ~4, Ben ~9 (had a shocker)
Accidential deletions of good code due to lack of sleep / backups: Matt 1, Ben 0
Final Grade: Not available yet
Reasons for lack of organisation: Lack of programming ability of the other 3 coders (their code was so useless they weren't even invited to the session, 3rd year computing students using WYSIWYG frontpage code to program HTML!), lack of organisation, under-estimation of the time it would take to complete some code. Of course we had done a very considerable amount of work prior to the start of this final session.
Dinner/Lunch breaks: Matt - 30 mins dinner, Ben 30 mins dinner/ 10 mins lunch
Days needed to recover: Matt 2, Ben ??

I think that covers it.

-------
Which came first the paper or the wall?

The Kelley & Pohl book is great. We had it set as the "intro to programming" text in CS at Deakin. I found its 'dissection' of programs very helpful..
dt..

Has nobody heard of the adventure shell?

--

Deakin University http://www.deakin.edu.au/ is really big on off-campus. I am off-campus myself, doing the Bachelor of Computing (Computer Science/Software Development). The school of Computing and Mathematics is here: http://www.cm.deakin.edu.au/.

They offer off-campus all over the world, and I know of one person last semester that was in California. Check them out...

-Fascist

Deakin University http://www.deakin.edu.au/ is really big on off-campus. I am off-campus myself, doing the Bachelor of Computing (Computer Science/Software Development). The school of Computing and Mathematics is here: http://www.cm.deakin.edu.au/.

They offer off-campus all over the world, and I know of one person last semester that was in California. Check them out...

-Fascist