The State government would have the power to regulate any monopolies inside its borders, including electrical providers, natural gas providers, phone companies, and yes Internet providers. - The local government/town that granted the exclusive license to Comcast also has the right to regulate, per the terms of the monopoly. Both these levels of government could mandate that Comcast provide equal access to ALL websites.
That's not necessarily so.
Indiana got a Telecommunications Reform Act a few years ago, written by the telecommunications industry (thanks to Mitch Daniels).
Cities are forbidden from competing with private telecomm. Regulation is done at the state level (which is reliably Republican, so only regulates consumers).
Irrelevant. If you can't take some trolls, maybe you shouldn't be in such a controversial topic. The accuracy of your data is far more significant than your petty emotions, especially if your data will be affecting trillions of dollars worldwide.
First, that sounds a lot like "if you're not willing to get beat up by my goons, don't say things I don't like."
Second, your emotional attachment to dollars seems to be driving your brain.
If you've spent any time in academia, you'd know that peer review is a cruel joke.
It's more politics than science.
Somebody didn't get tenure.
I didn't get tenure either, and there were serious political issues, the first time. But that's not a problem with peer review (which I still am asked to do, occasionally). Most PhD's never get tenure, at least not in a research university. Academia is one bitch of a career path.
I still publish papers, in less-prestigious journals and conferences, mostly peer-reviewed. Some papers are turned down. So it goes...
This is actually rather obvious. If Jimbo tells you that there's a 1% chance that your tire will go flat if you don't fix it, that's not 1% if Jimbo is wrong 50% of the time. At best, it's 50.5%. Or something like that.
You need to know the probability that it will go flat if Jimbo is right, and the probability if he's wrong. You don't.
Basically, they're saying that the research provides a wider error bound than it may claim, assuming that scientists uniformly make logical mistakes--which they very probably do.
What an interesting assertion. Foolish scientists!
Until people attempting to persuade people about evolution realize where people who believe in Christianity are coming from, there's not much real hope of doing it.
Before you install Mac OS X 10.5, make sure you have Application Enhancer (APE) 2.0.3 or later installed.... As long as you have APE 2.0.3, nothing bad will happen in 10.5. Well, nothing we can control. However, none of your APE Modules will work either.
Developers in Apple's Mac OS X developer program (ADC) got the final 10.5 GM yesterday. We are still downloading the huge 6.66GB image and as soon as the downloads finish for our developers, we will be hard at work on making our software work on 10.5....
I've forgotten who said it, but a while "supercomputer" is a relative term, it always costs at least 2 million dollars.
My first supercomputer http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/ibm709.html cost $2.6M [in 1960 dollars]. It was a 5 KFLOP system with a megabyte of memory.
How complicated is Go?
on
Cracking Go
·
· Score: 1
Elwyn Berlekamp [Berkeley math prof] and David Wolfe wrote a book, "Mathematical Go: Chilling Gets the Last Point," in which they analyzed some "end game" problems for Go. They found situations in which moves could be compared, but the "number" system involved many levels of infinitesimals, reflecting the subtlety of the game.
Everytime I read another study about how scientists have tried to replicate something humans find easy, and only manage to produce something that performs the task awkwardly, stupidly or otherwise ineptly, I feel vaguely in awe of how amazing the human body is.
Excuse me, but you must not remember or have much exposure to "toddlers." Heck, even after decades of practice, some of are still pretty awkward (not to mention stupid and otherwise inept, but let's don't go there;)
Slashdot Mirror
We're suddenly back in 1994, and "the job's not done until WordPerfect won't run!"
I normally program 60+ hours/wk, but I'm only in my 60's. I know a guy in his 80's, who normally programs 80+ hrs/wk.
You young punks are pathetic.
The State government would have the power to regulate any monopolies inside its borders, including electrical providers, natural gas providers, phone companies, and yes Internet providers. - The local government/town that granted the exclusive license to Comcast also has the right to regulate, per the terms of the monopoly. Both these levels of government could mandate that Comcast provide equal access to ALL websites.
That's not necessarily so.
Indiana got a Telecommunications Reform Act a few years ago, written by the telecommunications industry (thanks to Mitch Daniels).
Cities are forbidden from competing with private telecomm. Regulation is done at the state level (which is reliably Republican, so only regulates consumers).
The birthday collision illustrated:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
Even with 365 days a year, there is 50% probability that two people will have the same birthday in any random group of 23 people.
Now take 300 million people right now in the USofA.
Where is the evidence that these strings of "junk" DNA really are that unique?
If each of the 26 DNA sections were reduced to "Yes" or "No", the would be 2^26 possibilities.
If instead of 2 possibilities, there were 10, how many times does 3x10^8 go into 10^26? Just saying.
Really, a Faraday Box would totally make this a non-issue.
It's OK to have some holes in them, like for a door. Minor perturbation (use conformal mapping to verify).
Math is fun!:)
"Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to find something wrong with it?"
That used to be what Science was. Of course, that was when truth was the goal.
That's still the goal of Science.
But it's not the goal of everyone. Just as with tobacco and cancer, there are a lot of people with vested interests.
But the ice is melting.
Irrelevant. If you can't take some trolls, maybe you shouldn't be in such a controversial topic. The accuracy of your data is far more significant than your petty emotions, especially if your data will be affecting trillions of dollars worldwide.
First, that sounds a lot like "if you're not willing to get beat up by my goons, don't say things I don't like."
Second, your emotional attachment to dollars seems to be driving your brain.
Don't neglect "gravity exists because of a difference in concentration of information." Plato was as good a physicist.
If you've spent any time in academia, you'd know that peer review is a cruel joke.
It's more politics than science.
Somebody didn't get tenure.
I didn't get tenure either, and there were serious political issues, the first time. But that's not a problem with peer review (which I still am asked to do, occasionally). Most PhD's never get tenure, at least not in a research university. Academia is one bitch of a career path.
I still publish papers, in less-prestigious journals and conferences, mostly peer-reviewed. Some papers are turned down. So it goes...
You left out turtles! all the way down!
This is actually rather obvious. If Jimbo tells you that there's a 1% chance that your tire will go flat if you don't fix it, that's not 1% if Jimbo is wrong 50% of the time. At best, it's 50.5%. Or something like that.
You need to know the probability that it will go flat if Jimbo is right, and the probability if he's wrong. You don't.
Basically, they're saying that the research provides a wider error bound than it may claim, assuming that scientists uniformly make logical mistakes--which they very probably do.
What an interesting assertion. Foolish scientists!
The leap from "undecidable" to "random" just might be a hint that this is nonsense.
How does this mesh with surfer dude A. Garret Lisi's claims?
"I consider myself a libertarian idealist, with a pragmatic viewpoint... "
Where do I join the party!?
"I think finding a balanced solution is better than something that makes things better, even if it doesn't match the ideal."
I think finding something that makes things better, even if it doesn't match the ideal, is better than electing Republicans.
"For the Democrats, it's "immoral" to own a gun, or to not open your wallet and support every other person in the country financially."
Barack's position is just like Wyatt Earp's -- you can own a gun, but you can't necessarily carry it just everywhere.
And it's only about every one hundredth person -- it's cheaper to support them than it is to shoot them.
Wow! I never saw that page before! Thanks for the great link!
Black holes and strangelets are just the beginning. Have they read Einstein's Bridge? http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer/E_Bridge.html
THE HIVE WILL EAT US ALL!
Until people attempting to persuade people about evolution realize where people who believe in Christianity are coming from, there's not much real hope of doing it.
What, are you channeling Obama?
Prediction: Slashdot will be sued by Scientology within 24 hours.
Unsanity sent this on Saturday:
... As long as you have APE 2.0.3, nothing bad will happen in 10.5. Well, nothing we can control. However, none of your APE Modules will work either.
...
Before you install Mac OS X 10.5, make sure you have Application Enhancer (APE) 2.0.3 or later installed.
Developers in Apple's Mac OS X developer program (ADC) got the final 10.5 GM yesterday. We are still downloading the huge 6.66GB image and as soon as the downloads finish for our developers, we will be hard at work on making our software work on 10.5.
I've forgotten who said it, but a while "supercomputer" is a relative term, it always costs at least 2 million dollars. My first supercomputer http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/ibm709.html cost $2.6M [in 1960 dollars]. It was a 5 KFLOP system with a megabyte of memory.
Elwyn Berlekamp [Berkeley math prof] and David Wolfe wrote a book, "Mathematical Go: Chilling Gets the Last Point," in which they analyzed some "end game" problems for Go. They found situations in which moves could be compared, but the "number" system involved many levels of infinitesimals, reflecting the subtlety of the game.
It's like... magic!
We've tried a variety of them, and RT is the favorite here [major university/supercomputer center's IT department]. [Likewise for some other centers].
Excuse me, but you must not remember or have much exposure to "toddlers." Heck, even after decades of practice, some of are still pretty awkward (not to mention stupid and otherwise inept, but let's don't go there;)