If someone steals your physical wallet, with physical notes in it, is that due to lax security or flaws in the system? Does it change the value of the notes?
A Bitcoin wallet holds private keys to your coins (simplified). Don't lose the private keys. Store them as you would store other things of value.
When reading patents you ONLY have to check the claims. This is what's patented:
"What is claimed is: 1. An animal toy, comprising: (a) a solid main section having a diameter and a longitudinal length and extending a predetermined distance along said longitudinal length; and (b) at least one protrusion attached at one end thereof said main section and extending a predetermined distance therefrom and wherein said at least one protrusion includes a second longitudinal axis that is not in parallel alignment with a first longitudinal axis of said solid main section; and wherein said animal toy is adapted to float on the water."
Thanks for agreeing with me that there are no climate models that have run for any extended periods of time and thus been validated.
On the contrary, they seem to get falsified very quickly. (Not surprising though, we need a lot more science behind both ENSO variations and clouds before it's even likely they can perform useful predicitons)
Changing the whole model would be one (II to E) - that is why we have no model that has been verified against observations over an extended period of time yet.
As for GISS model E, it's quite a way off observations currently.
Agreed. Science would be to design a model and the observe how it fares over the next ten or so years. No changing of model parameters allowed.
That hasn't happened. If I'm allowed to change a model with enough free variables I can fit any history, and any observations-after-the-fact. But it's not science.
... your post has a distinct lack of the I part. You can fake things along quite nicely, sure, but you're still ages away from true artificial intelligence. Slapping some words up on a giant screen ain't it.
(that is: We consider things to be magic^H^H^H^H^Hintelligent as long as we don't understand how they work. As soon as we do, we shift the threshold for what's magic^H^H^H^H^Hintelligence to what we don't, yet, understand)
Slashdot Mirror
more extreme weather
Really? It's not visible in the data:
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/global_running_ace.jpg
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/tornado/tornadotrend.jpg
http://www.norman.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ustornadodeath2000_26874_image001.png
( I have no idea why Slashdot messes up the links, sorry - copy/paste)
it's heating too damn fast.
Is the resolution of the proxies we have that far back granular enough to qualify such a statement?
Man indigenous cultures don't even have a word for depression and wouldn't know what you meant if you explained to them.
[citation needed]
If someone steals your physical wallet, with physical notes in it, is that due to lax security or flaws in the system? Does it change the value of the notes?
A Bitcoin wallet holds private keys to your coins (simplified). Don't lose the private keys. Store them as you would store other things of value.
If you can crack RSA you can go after the traditional banking system a lot easier than Bitcoin (since it uses ECC).
Wuala seconded - I've recently made the switch from Dropbox to it.
.app in 1985: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2173906&cid=36196908
Apple has been using the term and suffix .app since it bought NeXT
My 1985 Atari ST with GEM used .app as extension for applications (and .prg for programs. Apparently there was a difference).
"start GEM and run INSTALL.APP"
http://www.retroarchive.org/cpm/archive/unofficial/gemworld.html
Yes, Sweden.
Please move all valuable infrastructure here.
(I'm only somewhat joking - the only real risk is that we're far enough up north to be quickly affected when the next ice age comes along)
Thanks, although that still means it did get through once.
When reading patents you ONLY have to check the claims. This is what's patented:
"What is claimed is:
1. An animal toy, comprising:
(a) a solid main section having a diameter and a longitudinal length and extending a predetermined distance along said longitudinal length; and
(b) at least one protrusion attached at one end thereof said main section and extending a predetermined distance therefrom and wherein said at least one protrusion includes a second longitudinal axis that is not in parallel alignment with a first longitudinal axis of said solid main section;
and wherein said animal toy is adapted to float on the water."
Although the NSA can also brute-force any 128-bit key in a few months
I lol'd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brute-force_attack#Theoretical_limits
Thanks for agreeing with me that there are no climate models that have run for any extended periods of time and thus been validated.
On the contrary, they seem to get falsified very quickly. (Not surprising though, we need a lot more science behind both ENSO variations and clouds before it's even likely they can perform useful predicitons)
Changing the whole model would be one (II to E) - that is why we have no model that has been verified against observations over an extended period of time yet.
As for GISS model E, it's quite a way off observations currently.
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/argo-era-nodc-ocean-heat-content-data-0-700-meters-through-december-2010/
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/giss-model-e-climate-simulations/
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/giss-model-e-climate-simulations-part-2/
Funny, but untrue. Your physical properties and laws aren't physical properties and laws, but best guesses.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/HOWTO.html
Again, no model has run for any extended amount of time without having had it's variables changed to fit observations. Thus not science.
Agreed. Science would be to design a model and the observe how it fares over the next ten or so years. No changing of model parameters allowed.
That hasn't happened. If I'm allowed to change a model with enough free variables I can fit any history, and any observations-after-the-fact. But it's not science.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2117354&cid=35990920
You can either go with that (we are apes, I would agree) or that we didn't descend from apes (but a common ancestor).
humans didn't descend from apes
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/evolution/humans-descended-from-apes.htm
The term application might have been used quite a bit but I think historically Mac OS X is the OS that used it in it's implementation.
1984 or so:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_Environment_Manager
GEM AES (Application Environment Services), provided the window management and UI elements
"apps": http://farm1.static.flickr.com/35/72215061_445ba4a777.jpg
And if I remember correctly, while most programs used the extension .prg, .app was also available and used.
Evolution does not suggest that man evolved from apes. You fail at trolling.
For very simple definitions of "circuits", yes, maybe the GP could be considered correct. That wasn't what I thought was claimed :)
The circuits for human language is ingrained into the brain at birth by our DNA
I'd love to read more about that.
... your post has a distinct lack of the I part. You can fake things along quite nicely, sure, but you're still ages away from true artificial intelligence. Slapping some words up on a giant screen ain't it.
(that is: We consider things to be magic^H^H^H^H^Hintelligent as long as we don't understand how they work. As soon as we do, we shift the threshold for what's magic^H^H^H^H^Hintelligence to what we don't, yet, understand)
Similar enough?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andyrkett/4368260369/
(2002)
Sony Ericsson P800
year 2002
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andyrkett/4368260369/