When you can make accurate guesses consistently over time, then maybe we can talk about calling them "predictions".
That's exactly the point he was making: give more credit to sources which have been shown righter in their previous predictions. But i guess agreeing wouldn't have given you the same ego boost.
You didn't predict anything. You made a guess. It took five entire years for reality to coincide with your guess.
A guess? Just because he did not give a time range? Well, he could easily have added "within 10 years". Many people did (I've been taught exactly that in 2002 during a market finance class). But even without it, who would you rather trust now that it did happen? Someone who said it was going to, someone who said it wasn't, or someone who had no idea whether it would or not? What you're doing is dismissing a statement claiming it does not contain enough information, which leaves you with either one that contains even less or one that contains none at all... Which contradicts your very point of wise trust allocation based on past record.
"as long as the cost of believing a superstition is less than the cost of missing a real association, superstitious beliefs will be favored."
Rationally speaking, if there's a significant positive expected return, how can that be superstition? It's just rational risk management. In other words, some form of pragmatic knowledge.
It's pretty easy to prove: drop a _non-superstitious_ mathematician in the rustling grass and see how long he survives... Hopefully for us, prehistoric men weren't so "clever" and we stood a chance of existing at all.
You're starting with a wrong assumption: the point of the embargo is not to make Cubans like the US (i will deprive you of food and you'll love me, right?) or dislike their government, it is to show surrounding countries what happens when one dares not comply with the US foreign policy plans. It is a pure demonstration of imperialist power, which "marketing" goal is working very well.
I tend to agree: using tags, you're not limited to disjoint sets. Intersections are quite common in real life, and designing the perfect category tree is not easy nor fast. Even when you succeed, you're always running the risk of being confronted with a new item that doesn't fit in your tree, or would need a complete tree redesign to fit in well (see biology).
However, tag systems usually are "all-flat" (Gmail is anyway): there is no notion of sub-category. If you're going to have dozens of tags, this is going to be messy too...
Although I don't agree with the "terrorists fixing governments" claim, the parent's "keeping the government's hands out of as many things as possible" claim is arguably stupid too.
After all, this is what has been the leading motto of American politics for 25 years (let's say since Reagan), and it lead exactly to where we are now: less power to governments, more power to big corporations, and eventually more crony capitalism. How long does it have to fail for you to realize it's a dead-end?
Less power to the government has never been, is still not, and will never be the way to protect and enforce democracy. Take the matter in your own hands, people: learn about politics, be informed, get involved, protest, *vote*. It's as simple as that, and definitely nothing new.
Less power to the government is just a lazy way of not having to do anything to keep it honest. If you don't stand for your own interests, others will for their own. How can that be a surprise, seriously?
This is clearly a programming mistake: they should have known they needed to unregister their event handlers. But more basically, this is bad design: if you're going to create so many objects you can crash the computer so fast, you should be using a pool of these objects in the first place (and reuse them). Why spend so much time allocating new objects and garbage collecting them? Finally, this is the wrong environment. If you're going to control a car driving in real time, wouldn't it make sense to use a real-time environment (language+OS) ?
Gee, when i think those guys can find thousands of dollars for such a project and i can't find a job...;-)
I see quite a few comments from C/C++ coders who wonder whether managed memory people know how event handling works. If they knew a little more about managed memory languages, they'd know a reference does not have to be "hard": you can have a reference to an object that does *not* prevent garbage collection.
So I guess the real question here is whether event handlers should be hard-referenced (as they are here), or just soft/weak referenced... From a developer perspective it's quite natural to think that, as long as his code doesn't hold any reference to an object, it should be garbage collectable. If registerEvent() shall hard-reference handlers, documentation should be *very* explicit about it (and the need to unregister a handler for GC to work on it). On the other hand, if handlers are not hard-referenced you can no longer register anonymous class event handlers...
Two economists walking down a street... First one says, looking on the ground: "Look, a hundred dollars note!" Second one responds: "Impossible: if there was one, somebody would have taken it already."
Well, none.:) 29.90 for an ADSL2+ connection with unlimited traffic, "cable" TV and free phone is the norm now. It's no match compared to Japanese offers, but it's a good deal for an E.U. country. And afaik, it's much better than what you can get in UK.
I guess Scandinavian countries (like Sweden, Finland...) are quite good too, with a pretty good network density even though those countries tend to be comparable to the US: few people compared to the country size, thus expensive coverage.
Don't think either of them is in the world top three, are they?
For the Asian area, Japan would doubtlessly be the leader in broadband access, whereas in Europe many countries have either higher broadband densities than England and/or cheaper broadband access (like $35/month for a 20Mb DSL in France, for example).
Should it be understood that US lie even behind England and China?
Slashdot Mirror
That's a winner in smart-assery:
When you can make accurate guesses consistently over time, then maybe we can talk about calling them "predictions".
That's exactly the point he was making: give more credit to sources which have been shown righter in their previous predictions. But i guess agreeing wouldn't have given you the same ego boost.
You didn't predict anything. You made a guess. It took five entire years for reality to coincide with your guess.
A guess? Just because he did not give a time range? Well, he could easily have added "within 10 years". Many people did (I've been taught exactly that in 2002 during a market finance class).
But even without it, who would you rather trust now that it did happen? Someone who said it was going to, someone who said it wasn't, or someone who had no idea whether it would or not?
What you're doing is dismissing a statement claiming it does not contain enough information, which leaves you with either one that contains even less or one that contains none at all... Which contradicts your very point of wise trust allocation based on past record.
"as long as the cost of believing a superstition is less than the cost of missing a real association, superstitious beliefs will be favored."
Rationally speaking, if there's a significant positive expected return, how can that be superstition? It's just rational risk management.
In other words, some form of pragmatic knowledge.
It's pretty easy to prove: drop a _non-superstitious_ mathematician in the rustling grass and see how long he survives...
Hopefully for us, prehistoric men weren't so "clever" and we stood a chance of existing at all.
No wonder you're confused...
You're starting with a wrong assumption: the point of the embargo is not to make Cubans like the US (i will deprive you of food and you'll love me, right?) or dislike their government, it is to show surrounding countries what happens when one dares not comply with the US foreign policy plans.
It is a pure demonstration of imperialist power, which "marketing" goal is working very well.
I tend to agree: using tags, you're not limited to disjoint sets.
Intersections are quite common in real life, and designing the perfect category tree is not easy nor fast. Even when you succeed, you're always running the risk of being confronted with a new item that doesn't fit in your tree, or would need a complete tree redesign to fit in well (see biology).
However, tag systems usually are "all-flat" (Gmail is anyway): there is no notion of sub-category.
If you're going to have dozens of tags, this is going to be messy too...
Although I don't agree with the "terrorists fixing governments" claim, the parent's "keeping the government's hands out of as many things as possible" claim is arguably stupid too.
After all, this is what has been the leading motto of American politics for 25 years (let's say since Reagan), and it lead exactly to where we are now: less power to governments, more power to big corporations, and eventually more crony capitalism.
How long does it have to fail for you to realize it's a dead-end?
Less power to the government has never been, is still not, and will never be the way to protect and enforce democracy.
Take the matter in your own hands, people: learn about politics, be informed, get involved, protest, *vote*.
It's as simple as that, and definitely nothing new.
Less power to the government is just a lazy way of not having to do anything to keep it honest. If you don't stand for your own interests, others will for their own. How can that be a surprise, seriously?
This is clearly a programming mistake: they should have known they needed to unregister their event handlers.
;-)
But more basically, this is bad design: if you're going to create so many objects you can crash the computer so fast, you should be using a pool of these objects in the first place (and reuse them). Why spend so much time allocating new objects and garbage collecting them?
Finally, this is the wrong environment. If you're going to control a car driving in real time, wouldn't it make sense to use a real-time environment (language+OS) ?
Gee, when i think those guys can find thousands of dollars for such a project and i can't find a job...
I see quite a few comments from C/C++ coders who wonder whether managed memory people know how event handling works. If they knew a little more about managed memory languages, they'd know a reference does not have to be "hard": you can have a reference to an object that does *not* prevent garbage collection.
So I guess the real question here is whether event handlers should be hard-referenced (as they are here), or just soft/weak referenced...
From a developer perspective it's quite natural to think that, as long as his code doesn't hold any reference to an object, it should be garbage collectable. If registerEvent() shall hard-reference handlers, documentation should be *very* explicit about it (and the need to unregister a handler for GC to work on it).
On the other hand, if handlers are not hard-referenced you can no longer register anonymous class event handlers...
A bunch of freedom fries, please.
Two economists walking down a street...
First one says, looking on the ground: "Look, a hundred dollars note!"
Second one responds: "Impossible: if there was one, somebody would have taken it already."
I'm sure this situation won't last long. :)
Well, none. :)
29.90 for an ADSL2+ connection with unlimited traffic, "cable" TV and free phone is the norm now.
It's no match compared to Japanese offers, but it's a good deal for an E.U. country. And afaik, it's much better than what you can get in UK.
I guess Scandinavian countries (like Sweden, Finland...) are quite good too, with a pretty good network density even though those countries tend to be comparable to the US: few people compared to the country size, thus expensive coverage.
Don't think either of them is in the world top three, are they? For the Asian area, Japan would doubtlessly be the leader in broadband access, whereas in Europe many countries have either higher broadband densities than England and/or cheaper broadband access (like $35/month for a 20Mb DSL in France, for example). Should it be understood that US lie even behind England and China?