I agree. Given the (alleged) special relationship between the countries, all it would take is just asking on the part of CIA's chief. In fact, Israeli security specialists have been consulting for free in various friendly countries around the world. The whole cost was covered by the Israeli govt. - because Israel has a vested interest in containing terrorism anywhere. So, IOW, they would be more than happy to share with the US their methods on counter-terrorism in airfare situations.
You are right about the interview at the airport - I landed in Ben Gurion and had the one, short interview, and then a somewhat even shorter one on departure. So my experience was much shorter than yours, but I share the impression that they were not unfriendly, actually quite cordial.
My interviews to and from the US were less pleasant, to say the least. But as I said, I am from a country that needs a visa for the US, while you are, I guess, a US or UK citizen - very different thing. The interviews were generally not nice, and I felt that we were all, regardless of our origin or purpose of visit, treated as "probably a criminal". Or the officials/officers are all cranky, all of the time. I had the same feeling during the luggage security checks. More than just the interviews, however, what bothered me was the sheer slowness and convoluteness of the process. Mind you, I am NOT negatively biased against the US - quite the contrary. And I enjoyed a lot my stay in Washington DC. I had a grand time, but as I was leaving, I asked myself "I'd really like to bring my wife and son to Washington DC and see the Smithsonain air and space museum annex - but do I really want to put myself through all this, let alone my wife?".
Especially because the terrorist in question remained in his seat the whole time.
In fact, the only person who seems to have left his seat is the guy who got up to stop the attack. So, should he have remained seated instead?
Exactly - how on earth did the TSA come up with such seemingly braindead directive? Makes you think that either there's someone incredibly cunning, or a sufficiently large group of utterly unimaginative and obtuse individuals work for the TSA.
It's stupid not because it's exaggerated, but because it's ineffective. It's BS. I went to a conference in the US at the end of November, and was reminded just how bad it is to fly to and from the US. I have also flown to and from Israel, a country very much in the crosshairs of terrorists, and the security procedure was MUCH more humane, both on the flights and at boarding. (in fact, I didn't even need a visa for Israel, while I need to go through an incredibly complicated and expensive procedure to get a US visa... but this is a different story (or is it?)) The Israelis do have some security processes in place, but they are mostly stealth and unobtrusive. Well, in any case, they must be doing something right, because there has not been a hijacked or otherwise terror-affected flight to or from Israel in decades now.
Folding@home enthusiasts and academic contributors did more than that, and a long time ago, too. Just check this thread at foldingforums for one example.
NOt necessarily every country: in Finland, people and companies have a pretty solid track record of taking responsibility of their actions. It's part of the culture. The chinese have, on the other hand, a solid track record of lies and deceptions. Just look at the various falsities/fakeries during the Beijing Olympic games.
Agree on the new metamod system: it doesn't make a lick of a sense to me, either. It's a bad combination of "If you don't want to not negate this, answer affirmatively" and total uncertainty whether your metamodding went through or not - did you actually metamoderate those moderations? Or have you just done a moderation of a lesser kind of the comment itself? Has anything even been submitted or are your metamods lost? etc.
In that case Jobs is likely screwed. Kallasvuo is an asshole (I used to work in Nokia till that douche came to power) but he's fit: works out and does lots of sports. Jobs, well, his body has seen better days.
First of all (I'm a researcher in power MEMS/micro power sources), I must say that a battery that has been tested for 600 hours count as an excellent proof of concept. Most of the stuff we develop we're happy if it works for minutes, let alone hundreds of hours. This is in advanced stage. Second: so what if it's "only" a primary battery? The market for primary batteries is HUGE and because they are disposable, making them cheap and environmentally friendly is just if not more important, than with secondary batteries.
I have learned that 100% of SD cards and USB drives on eBay, if from China or Hong-Kong, are counterfeits, and you're lucky if they actually have the specified capacity. You're shit-out of luck if you hope to find a good quality SLC Flash-RAM component (be it SD, CF or USB drive) - they're all MLC.
Another example: did you know that 90% of Indian Sandalwood on the market is either not Sandalwood (it's adulterated) or, if you're lucky, it's not Indian (rather Australian or New Caledonian, much lesser in quality and Santalol content)? Other essential oils' adulteration is rampant as well. There's at least twice as much Lavendel EO on the market, than there's world production.
Olive oil adulteration is very common in Spain, Italy and Greece. Coconut oil adulteration is rampant as well. And this is stuff people _eat_! And then there are several Chinese milk scandals, where dozens of babies were killed.
A strong consumer association should emerge and help sorting out the good stuff from the bad. I don't know the solution to the problem, frankly, but I know it's bad and getting worse.
Most of the whining about "deletionism" is from fans who want to blither endlessly about their favorite movie/comic book/Star Trek episode/vampire.
Not true at all - most chagrin about deletions come from people interested in science and math, when articles are made less comprehensive and dramatically reduced. THAT is where the most animosity comes from.
Deletionists are people wholly incapable of understanding that topics uninteresting to them are not necessarily topics uninteresting to everyone. They also don't understand that there's plenty of space available, and that a multitude of articles doesn't cause confusion because there are search engines and disambiguation.
In other words, deletionists are both douchebags AND stupid. Not sure either can be fixed.
Except that Sony is not selling them below production costs. It costs them about $250 apiece to produce.
Also, if Sony wanted to be angry, "now" is too late already, because the Pande Group (home and founders of Folding@Home) has bought thousands of PS3s for running their protein folding algorithms.
True enough, but the whole concept of PLoS ONE is different from traditional article publishing, in that it strongly relies on relevance - based on web-metrics (such as unique accesses, links, citations etc.). An article that is cited less frequently and accessed less frequently can be scored lower than one more often cited and accessed. Eventually they will sort themselves out naturally, and by a much wider peer-review pool than the usual few. I've seen too many peer-reviewed and published articles that are utter rubbish, to put all my faith in the usual peer-review process. I'm not saying it's not important, but it's not all it's cracked up to be.
Massive cash awards to US scientists. These kids choose not to go into science because it is not cool. Why is it not cool? Lots of hardwork and small incomes. If you give scientists boat loads of money, they become cool.
Instead we will waste another $huge_amount dollars on some lame education effort only to have the kids still want to be Kobe Bryant, or Dr. Dre.
I think this post is the one closest to a solution of the problem. When scientific research receives the recognition it deserves, with massive amounts of cash and fame, you'll see more people interested in it. Treat scientists like pro footballers or basketball players, and watch things change to the better, scientific output skyrocket and humanity profiting in a big way.
Last week I needed an article published in 1949. And the journal still charges for this article! My institution doesn't have a subscription to that vintage articles of the journal (though I can access newer articles from the same journal). OK... WTF??? 194 freakin' 9 and they still have it locked down???? Is this not a miscarriage of what science should be?
So... public access journals all the way. The good articles will percolate up to the top eventually.
PLoS ONE, if you didn't know, is a public-access scientific journal publishing enterprise. No more use/abuse of scientists as creator of content AND reviewers of content (who both do this for free) and then only releasing the articles for profit, for the next 100 years. I am thoroughly disgusted by this business model which takes the work of us scientists, gives nothing back and then profits from it. Fuck that.
PLoS ONE, I wish you luck. Please do crush the Natures, Sciences and Elseviers of this world. Pretty please.
Yeah. For once, this case was conducted in a civilized manner, much to my own surprise. Yes, I admit I am surprised, because I expected a slightly different modus operandi from a company like Microsoft, with a uber-competitive, testosterone-saturated corporate culture. This, for me, more than any other, is a proof that Microsoft is changing.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. Given the (alleged) special relationship between the countries, all it would take is just asking on the part of CIA's chief. In fact, Israeli security specialists have been consulting for free in various friendly countries around the world. The whole cost was covered by the Israeli govt. - because Israel has a vested interest in containing terrorism anywhere. So, IOW, they would be more than happy to share with the US their methods on counter-terrorism in airfare situations.
You are right about the interview at the airport - I landed in Ben Gurion and had the one, short interview, and then a somewhat even shorter one on departure. So my experience was much shorter than yours, but I share the impression that they were not unfriendly, actually quite cordial.
My interviews to and from the US were less pleasant, to say the least. But as I said, I am from a country that needs a visa for the US, while you are, I guess, a US or UK citizen - very different thing. The interviews were generally not nice, and I felt that we were all, regardless of our origin or purpose of visit, treated as "probably a criminal". Or the officials/officers are all cranky, all of the time. I had the same feeling during the luggage security checks. More than just the interviews, however, what bothered me was the sheer slowness and convoluteness of the process. Mind you, I am NOT negatively biased against the US - quite the contrary. And I enjoyed a lot my stay in Washington DC. I had a grand time, but as I was leaving, I asked myself "I'd really like to bring my wife and son to Washington DC and see the Smithsonain air and space museum annex - but do I really want to put myself through all this, let alone my wife?".
Especially because the terrorist in question remained in his seat the whole time.
In fact, the only person who seems to have left his seat is the guy who got up to stop the attack. So, should he have remained seated instead?
Exactly - how on earth did the TSA come up with such seemingly braindead directive? Makes you think that either there's someone incredibly cunning, or a sufficiently large group of utterly unimaginative and obtuse individuals work for the TSA.
It's stupid not because it's exaggerated, but because it's ineffective. It's BS. I went to a conference in the US at the end of November, and was reminded just how bad it is to fly to and from the US. I have also flown to and from Israel, a country very much in the crosshairs of terrorists, and the security procedure was MUCH more humane, both on the flights and at boarding. (in fact, I didn't even need a visa for Israel, while I need to go through an incredibly complicated and expensive procedure to get a US visa... but this is a different story (or is it?)) The Israelis do have some security processes in place, but they are mostly stealth and unobtrusive. Well, in any case, they must be doing something right, because there has not been a hijacked or otherwise terror-affected flight to or from Israel in decades now.
OK then. I'm raising an eyebrow in somewhat heightened interest.
They have more powerful GPUs, and have had them since a long time.
Folding@home enthusiasts and academic contributors did more than that, and a long time ago, too. Just check this thread at foldingforums for one example.
NOt necessarily every country: in Finland, people and companies have a pretty solid track record of taking responsibility of their actions. It's part of the culture. The chinese have, on the other hand, a solid track record of lies and deceptions. Just look at the various falsities/fakeries during the Beijing Olympic games.
Hahah, glad at least one person got the joke ;o)
Agree on the new metamod system: it doesn't make a lick of a sense to me, either. It's a bad combination of "If you don't want to not negate this, answer affirmatively" and total uncertainty whether your metamodding went through or not - did you actually metamoderate those moderations? Or have you just done a moderation of a lesser kind of the comment itself? Has anything even been submitted or are your metamods lost? etc.
Also, do use this lovely resource, if you get a good 'scope.
Taking into consideration dupes and tripes (or whatever it's called a dupe of a dupe ;)
In that case Jobs is likely screwed. Kallasvuo is an asshole (I used to work in Nokia till that douche came to power) but he's fit: works out and does lots of sports. Jobs, well, his body has seen better days.
Eric Schmidt was honest about what their search engine does with privacy data. MS/Ballmer won't say.
You are right, but it's hard to determine the soundness of a design if QC is lacking, even in the supply chain.
First of all (I'm a researcher in power MEMS/micro power sources), I must say that a battery that has been tested for 600 hours count as an excellent proof of concept. Most of the stuff we develop we're happy if it works for minutes, let alone hundreds of hours. This is in advanced stage. Second: so what if it's "only" a primary battery? The market for primary batteries is HUGE and because they are disposable, making them cheap and environmentally friendly is just if not more important, than with secondary batteries.
I have learned that 100% of SD cards and USB drives on eBay, if from China or Hong-Kong, are counterfeits, and you're lucky if they actually have the specified capacity. You're shit-out of luck if you hope to find a good quality SLC Flash-RAM component (be it SD, CF or USB drive) - they're all MLC.
Another example: did you know that 90% of Indian Sandalwood on the market is either not Sandalwood (it's adulterated) or, if you're lucky, it's not Indian (rather Australian or New Caledonian, much lesser in quality and Santalol content)? Other essential oils' adulteration is rampant as well. There's at least twice as much Lavendel EO on the market, than there's world production.
Olive oil adulteration is very common in Spain, Italy and Greece. Coconut oil adulteration is rampant as well. And this is stuff people _eat_! And then there are several Chinese milk scandals, where dozens of babies were killed.
A strong consumer association should emerge and help sorting out the good stuff from the bad. I don't know the solution to the problem, frankly, but I know it's bad and getting worse.
Most of the whining about "deletionism" is from fans who want to blither endlessly about their favorite movie/comic book/Star Trek episode/vampire.
Not true at all - most chagrin about deletions come from people interested in science and math, when articles are made less comprehensive and dramatically reduced. THAT is where the most animosity comes from.
Deletionists are people wholly incapable of understanding that topics uninteresting to them are not necessarily topics uninteresting to everyone. They also don't understand that there's plenty of space available, and that a multitude of articles doesn't cause confusion because there are search engines and disambiguation.
In other words, deletionists are both douchebags AND stupid. Not sure either can be fixed.
Except that Sony is not selling them below production costs. It costs them about $250 apiece to produce.
Also, if Sony wanted to be angry, "now" is too late already, because the Pande Group (home and founders of Folding@Home) has bought thousands of PS3s for running their protein folding algorithms.
True enough, but the whole concept of PLoS ONE is different from traditional article publishing, in that it strongly relies on relevance - based on web-metrics (such as unique accesses, links, citations etc.). An article that is cited less frequently and accessed less frequently can be scored lower than one more often cited and accessed. Eventually they will sort themselves out naturally, and by a much wider peer-review pool than the usual few. I've seen too many peer-reviewed and published articles that are utter rubbish, to put all my faith in the usual peer-review process. I'm not saying it's not important, but it's not all it's cracked up to be.
Massive cash awards to US scientists. These kids choose not to go into science because it is not cool. Why is it not cool? Lots of hardwork and small incomes. If you give scientists boat loads of money, they become cool.
Instead we will waste another $huge_amount dollars on some lame education effort only to have the kids still want to be Kobe Bryant, or Dr. Dre.
I think this post is the one closest to a solution of the problem. When scientific research receives the recognition it deserves, with massive amounts of cash and fame, you'll see more people interested in it. Treat scientists like pro footballers or basketball players, and watch things change to the better, scientific output skyrocket and humanity profiting in a big way.
Last week I needed an article published in 1949. And the journal still charges for this article! My institution doesn't have a subscription to that vintage articles of the journal (though I can access newer articles from the same journal). OK... WTF??? 194 freakin' 9 and they still have it locked down???? Is this not a miscarriage of what science should be?
So... public access journals all the way. The good articles will percolate up to the top eventually.
PLoS ONE, if you didn't know, is a public-access scientific journal publishing enterprise. No more use/abuse of scientists as creator of content AND reviewers of content (who both do this for free) and then only releasing the articles for profit, for the next 100 years. I am thoroughly disgusted by this business model which takes the work of us scientists, gives nothing back and then profits from it. Fuck that.
PLoS ONE, I wish you luck. Please do crush the Natures, Sciences and Elseviers of this world. Pretty please.
Yeah. For once, this case was conducted in a civilized manner, much to my own surprise. Yes, I admit I am surprised, because I expected a slightly different modus operandi from a company like Microsoft, with a uber-competitive, testosterone-saturated corporate culture. This, for me, more than any other, is a proof that Microsoft is changing.