I was refused entry into Holland decades ago and while I now hold a different citizenship, I have never bothered to to try to go there again. There are so many other, more interesting and friendlier places to visit. Who wants to see boring wind mills, stinking canals and dirty old Rembrands anyway?
That's too bad because, to be honest, The Netherlands is an awesome country, and Amsterdam... is IMHO, the most interesting city in the entire world (and that's compared to some pretty interesting places like Bangkok, Seoul or Atlanta).
Also, I'll never forget the almost universal, genuine kindness of the people in Amsterdam.
FWIW, in my case cutural differences didn't play a role. It was a misunderstanding about Schengen countries vs. visa requirement.
Also FWIW, I was told that the Belgian border policemen had no business telling me about the 10 year ban on entry. No such thing exists in such cases. Stil, the memory was bad enough that I never went back. I remember that, sometimes 4 or 5 years ago, I just realized "hey, I actually didn't visit Belgium this whole time!!".:D
The exact same thing happened to me, just replace Poland with Croatia, Mexico with Finland and USA with Belgium. The asshole border police at the Bruxelles airport let me fly to Finland finally, but admonished me that "I am not allowed to come to Belgium for the next 10 years". This was 15 years ago and I now have a Finnish citizenship and have traveled all around the world, visited four different continents. But funnily enough, by pure chance I never went to Belgium again. Maybe it wasn't chance, maybe the bad experience made me put Belgium in the "fuck that country"-category.
So I make a very ordinary salary as a software engineer, but could probably raise it by 25% by changing jobs but not venturing too far outside my comfort zone.
However, I've got friends who went from earning roughly as much as I did, to quadrupling what I'm making, simply because they play fast and loose: lying about past salaries, standing job offers, etc, to get raises; and taking jobs they're not always qualified for, simply because they're good at bullshit.
What this is REALLY saying, is that they're doing well because the free market values liars and bullshitters. The people who are the most profitable to employers however, are the people whose personalities and personal moral code precludes them from earning too much, allowing employers to get a bigger spread between 1) what they pay employees, and 2) what those employees contribute to their bottom line.
The reality is a bit more complex than I make out (bad directors persist, because big institutional investors want stability and don't want to rock the boat; nepotism (sometimes a good thing!!); information asymmetries everywhere, etc., etc.). Simply put, being a slimy, lying cunt pays -- and not everybody can be a director, because not everybody has the stomach to do what they need to do to get there.
I am tempted to declare this, one of the best posts in Slashdot's history.
recently China returned 12 NK soldiers that tried to escape.
I shudder at the thought of those soldiers' fate, considering that NK has concentration camps where entire families are kept in sub-human conditions, tortured, experimented upon etc.
Like most things it's not that simple. At 13 I would've agreed with your final conclusion. Then I grew up and learned the world is more complicated than that. I've also worked with and taught HS kids, where I learned things get even more complicated when you know even more of the backstory. Bullying often stems from problems, many of them at home. Abusive parents, neglectful parents, absent parents, actual mental issues, economic problems, familial stress, physical injuries, drug and alcohol issues and many more things all can play a part.
Bullies are often not evil kids, and a countrywide reaction to bullies Hammurabi style would do an enormous amount of damage too, as would simply overlooking competence, however fair it seems. Yes, there are some kids who would stop bullying if they get punched in the nose but there are many more who stop bullying *you* and move on to a easier target, and that's obviously not an answer from a societal view of things, since not all those bullied can punch the bully in the nose. The best approach is not a blanket one, but one that would take bullies and send them social workers to figure out what the hell is going on to begin with.
All of what you wrote, I agree with. In addition, I am a left-leaning person (and live in what Americans would deem a "socialist" country).
But none of what you wrote means that bullies should be given free rein and inflict childhood trauma onto other kids. Hence, I'll teach my son to defend himself, and if push comes to shove, a bully will have a finger or nose broken. That may actually be good for the bully in the long run, too, as the social services will be spurred to intervene (if they haven't already).
So yes, let social services and other institutions take care of the root cause of the bully's asocial behavior. In the meantime, my son will stay safe by engaging in self-defense.
Anybody that worked in the field would tell you that mostly that part of the job is not properly done, especially text layouting.
So I thought the author wanted to emphasize layouting. I had (and still have) a gripe with poor orthography and grammar, that is so merrily left unadulterated in the final version of so many manuscripts.
Right now, it's ridiculous and it will die sooner or later if someone comes forth with a good alternative (no matter how good nature is).
PLoS publishes Open Access journals with high impact factors. More importantly, they publish extremely interesting scientific research and have visibility that goes way beyond the impact factor alone. A lot of people link to PLoS articles in their blogs, on Google+, Reddit etc.
Nature, in contrast, keeps articles captive. Even old articles, from the 20s and 30s (some topics are still relevant, like surface tension), can be only accessed by paying those greedy bastards. Fuck Nature.
If you have problem finding papers, I recommend you try academic search engines. At OSU, we developped theadvisor ( http://theadvisor.osu.edu/ [osu.edu] ). It is a webservice that allows you to search paper that are similar to what you already know. You basically upload a set of papers you know are relevant and the system find what is around.
Google Scholar does something similar to this: based on your published papers (including conference papers), it monitors the "journalosphere" and alerts me whenever there are new published papers related to my research. And it's scarily accurate. Scarily, because it reminds me every time how many people are working on topics similar to mine, and that I have competition!
This is an enthusiasts card, pushing the boundaries of the current generation AMD GPUs to squeeze out more performance. I think it is safe to say that X will not be sufficiently small. Or more accurately; 3X will not be sufficiently small.
I would venture to guess that fan reliability scales super-linearly with fan speed and that we're talking about a speed for which the failure rate of one fan of speed X is smaller than the failure rate of any of 3 fans at 3X.
I just don't think the AMD engineers are total idiots. Obviously I have no evidence, but I prefer not to assume they are.
I see that you took my innocent little joke, and went with it! Well, OK then, I'll go one further and declare that my statement is true for X=0.
Note that, logically, when I said "sufficiently small" I didn't talk about the needs of the graphic card's cooling. I was only looking at the fans' reliability.
The only thing the publisher provide now a days is grammar check and spell check
As a researcher who has read hundreds, possibly thousands of journal articles, I say bollocks. Maybe Nature Publishing Group journals do a thorough spelling and grammar check, but all the others (in the field of chemistry, materials science and nanotechnology at least) do not.
I have not heard one single source say they were leaving SPARC
Ok , here's one. Albeit a few years ago.. We were having a lot of sad times with the Sun V880. We wanted faster Disk I/O along with a more usable OS. Solaris 9 (& 10), at the time, would boot and run Oracle but it was impossible to get patches for it. We used to download them from Sun's website but then all of a sudden you needed a Vendor ID. After submitting the Vendor ID, downloads still didn't work. iSCSI in particular was important to us but it just didn't work well. Buggy and horribly slow. We finally ended up ditching the V880 and going with two multi-core x86_64 Linux boxes running Centos and SSD raid. The DBA said some of his nightly processes finished in 1/6 of the time it took on the v880. All for a fraction of the cost of the Sun hardware. Yes, the sun stuff is sexy and built like a tank. Yes, it will run for decades without any trouble. If I never see a Sun product again it will be too soon.
You could at least quote the OP's statement correctly:
I have not heard one single source say they were leaving SPARC because of performance concerns.
As far as I know, mining bitcoins is extremely CPU intensive. So unless the bitcoins will be spent on planting trees (or something...), the increase in the electric bill due to the increased CPU power dissipation (more electricity to feed the CPU and more electricity to cool it) makes things less green, not more.
But maybe a new definition of "green" is used here? Such as... "profit"?
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I'm happy to see USPTO make another decision that makes sense.
I agree, but am worried that it may be just a fluke.
I was refused entry into Holland decades ago and while I now hold a different citizenship, I have never bothered to to try to go there again. There are so many other, more interesting and friendlier places to visit. Who wants to see boring wind mills, stinking canals and dirty old Rembrands anyway?
That's too bad because, to be honest, The Netherlands is an awesome country, and Amsterdam... is IMHO, the most interesting city in the entire world (and that's compared to some pretty interesting places like Bangkok, Seoul or Atlanta).
Also, I'll never forget the almost universal, genuine kindness of the people in Amsterdam.
It's not an April's fool joke if you can tell by looking at it for 2 microseconds.
April 1st is just the day when Slashdot is utterly useless. Every Single One of the news stories is a ridiculously badly camouflaged "joke".
Too bad, 'cause I'm in bed with a flu. Oh well...
The whole day, and right now, this story is in the top 10 most read articles on BBC News
So clearly, someone does give a rat's ass.
Dude... 50 million without healthcare.
You know which other first world country doesn't have universal heathcare?
None.
Cuba definitely does have better healthcare than the US, where 50 million people have none.
For instance, Cuba has two and a half more doctors per capita than the US
Oh, and here's another datapoint: the table shows literacy levels in Cuba being higher than the USA.
FWIW, in my case cutural differences didn't play a role. It was a misunderstanding about Schengen countries vs. visa requirement.
Also FWIW, I was told that the Belgian border policemen had no business telling me about the 10 year ban on entry. No such thing exists in such cases. Stil, the memory was bad enough that I never went back. I remember that, sometimes 4 or 5 years ago, I just realized "hey, I actually didn't visit Belgium this whole time!!". :D
He did make the situation worse by being an obnoxious asshole. I don't work for the TSA and would give this guy a hard problem too.
There are only 1-2% psychopaths in the world - psychopaths like you. This place would be heaven if your kind were removed.
The exact same thing happened to me, just replace Poland with Croatia, Mexico with Finland and USA with Belgium. The asshole border police at the Bruxelles airport let me fly to Finland finally, but admonished me that "I am not allowed to come to Belgium for the next 10 years". This was 15 years ago and I now have a Finnish citizenship and have traveled all around the world, visited four different continents. But funnily enough, by pure chance I never went to Belgium again. Maybe it wasn't chance, maybe the bad experience made me put Belgium in the "fuck that country"-category.
So I make a very ordinary salary as a software engineer, but could probably raise it by 25% by changing jobs but not venturing too far outside my comfort zone.
However, I've got friends who went from earning roughly as much as I did, to quadrupling what I'm making, simply because they play fast and loose: lying about past salaries, standing job offers, etc, to get raises; and taking jobs they're not always qualified for, simply because they're good at bullshit.
What this is REALLY saying, is that they're doing well because the free market values liars and bullshitters. The people who are the most profitable to employers however, are the people whose personalities and personal moral code precludes them from earning too much, allowing employers to get a bigger spread between 1) what they pay employees, and 2) what those employees contribute to their bottom line.
The reality is a bit more complex than I make out (bad directors persist, because big institutional investors want stability and don't want to rock the boat; nepotism (sometimes a good thing!!); information asymmetries everywhere, etc., etc.). Simply put, being a slimy, lying cunt pays -- and not everybody can be a director, because not everybody has the stomach to do what they need to do to get there.
I am tempted to declare this, one of the best posts in Slashdot's history.
In what parallel universe is this true?
recently China returned 12 NK soldiers that tried to escape.
I shudder at the thought of those soldiers' fate, considering that NK has concentration camps where entire families are kept in sub-human conditions, tortured, experimented upon etc.
A $200 Win 8 RT tablet could be compelling,
I know: it's that extensive software library for Windows RT.
Like most things it's not that simple. At 13 I would've agreed with your final conclusion. Then I grew up and learned the world is more complicated than that. I've also worked with and taught HS kids, where I learned things get even more complicated when you know even more of the backstory. Bullying often stems from problems, many of them at home. Abusive parents, neglectful parents, absent parents, actual mental issues, economic problems, familial stress, physical injuries, drug and alcohol issues and many more things all can play a part.
Bullies are often not evil kids, and a countrywide reaction to bullies Hammurabi style would do an enormous amount of damage too, as would simply overlooking competence, however fair it seems. Yes, there are some kids who would stop bullying if they get punched in the nose but there are many more who stop bullying *you* and move on to a easier target, and that's obviously not an answer from a societal view of things, since not all those bullied can punch the bully in the nose. The best approach is not a blanket one, but one that would take bullies and send them social workers to figure out what the hell is going on to begin with.
All of what you wrote, I agree with. In addition, I am a left-leaning person (and live in what Americans would deem a "socialist" country).
But none of what you wrote means that bullies should be given free rein and inflict childhood trauma onto other kids. Hence, I'll teach my son to defend himself, and if push comes to shove, a bully will have a finger or nose broken. That may actually be good for the bully in the long run, too, as the social services will be spurred to intervene (if they haven't already).
So yes, let social services and other institutions take care of the root cause of the bully's asocial behavior. In the meantime, my son will stay safe by engaging in self-defense.
Well, the whole quote is actually:
Anybody that worked in the field would tell you that mostly that part of the job is not properly done, especially text layouting.
So I thought the author wanted to emphasize layouting. I had (and still have) a gripe with poor orthography and grammar, that is so merrily left unadulterated in the final version of so many manuscripts.
The twist in theadvisor is that you can select the "input papers". google scholar uses you publication list as inputs.
I'm aware of this. You were quite clear in the original post.
The most famous Open Access publisher, PLoS, only charges $1350 (and often waives all fees). What fucking journal asks for $3000? That's preposterous.
Right now, it's ridiculous and it will die sooner or later if someone comes forth with a good alternative (no matter how good nature is).
PLoS publishes Open Access journals with high impact factors. More importantly, they publish extremely interesting scientific research and have visibility that goes way beyond the impact factor alone. A lot of people link to PLoS articles in their blogs, on Google+, Reddit etc.
Nature, in contrast, keeps articles captive. Even old articles, from the 20s and 30s (some topics are still relevant, like surface tension), can be only accessed by paying those greedy bastards. Fuck Nature.
If you have problem finding papers, I recommend you try academic search engines. At OSU, we developped theadvisor ( http://theadvisor.osu.edu/ [osu.edu] ). It is a webservice that allows you to search paper that are similar to what you already know. You basically upload a set of papers you know are relevant and the system find what is around.
Google Scholar does something similar to this: based on your published papers (including conference papers), it monitors the "journalosphere" and alerts me whenever there are new published papers related to my research. And it's scarily accurate. Scarily, because it reminds me every time how many people are working on topics similar to mine, and that I have competition!
This is an enthusiasts card, pushing the boundaries of the current generation AMD GPUs to squeeze out more performance. I think it is safe to say that X will not be sufficiently small. Or more accurately; 3X will not be sufficiently small.
I would venture to guess that fan reliability scales super-linearly with fan speed and that we're talking about a speed for which the failure rate of one fan of speed X is smaller than the failure rate of any of 3 fans at 3X.
I just don't think the AMD engineers are total idiots. Obviously I have no evidence, but I prefer not to assume they are.
I see that you took my innocent little joke, and went with it! Well, OK then, I'll go one further and declare that my statement is true for X=0.
Note that, logically, when I said "sufficiently small" I didn't talk about the needs of the graphic card's cooling. I was only looking at the fans' reliability.
Too many crooks
Easiest FTFY ever.
However, which do you think would be more reliable, three fans at X rpm or one fan at 3X rpm?
One fan at 3X... for a sufficiently small X.
The only thing the publisher provide now a days is grammar check and spell check
As a researcher who has read hundreds, possibly thousands of journal articles, I say bollocks. Maybe Nature Publishing Group journals do a thorough spelling and grammar check, but all the others (in the field of chemistry, materials science and nanotechnology at least) do not.
I have not heard one single source say they were leaving SPARC
Ok , here's one. Albeit a few years ago.. We were having a lot of sad times with the Sun V880. We wanted faster Disk I/O along with a more usable OS. Solaris 9 (& 10), at the time, would boot and run Oracle but it was impossible to get patches for it. We used to download them from Sun's website but then all of a sudden you needed a Vendor ID. After submitting the Vendor ID, downloads still didn't work. iSCSI in particular was important to us but it just didn't work well. Buggy and horribly slow. We finally ended up ditching the V880 and going with two multi-core x86_64 Linux boxes running Centos and SSD raid. The DBA said some of his nightly processes finished in 1/6 of the time it took on the v880. All for a fraction of the cost of the Sun hardware. Yes, the sun stuff is sexy and built like a tank. Yes, it will run for decades without any trouble. If I never see a Sun product again it will be too soon.
You could at least quote the OP's statement correctly:
I have not heard one single source say they were leaving SPARC because of performance concerns.
I noticed your sig, which says:
You sir, win at hypocrisy.
As far as I know, mining bitcoins is extremely CPU intensive. So unless the bitcoins will be spent on planting trees (or something...), the increase in the electric bill due to the increased CPU power dissipation (more electricity to feed the CPU and more electricity to cool it) makes things less green, not more.
But maybe a new definition of "green" is used here? Such as... "profit"?