This follows into the gambler's fallacy though; the idea that an event of the past determines the odds of a non-affected event of the future. (i.e. I rolled 1 3 times so the odds of rolling 1 must be less than it was before)
The real logic is:
Tuesday is irrelevant. The odds of the days being different carries no bearing towards the sex of the child. It would require more information for it to be meaningful (such as, they were born on different days of the week). In twins, it is possible that one child is born on one day and the other isn't. Likewise, it is possible to have twins of opposite sexes. Thus day is irrelevant here too.
The odds of picking children are (sex, birth order):
B1 B2 - picked first boy out of 2 boys
B2 B1 - picked second boy out of 2 boys
B1 G2 - picked first born child (boy) and left girl
B2 G1 - picked second born child (boy) and left girl
G1 G2 - not possible
G2 G1 - not possible
Eliminate the times when both are girls and you are given 4 choices, and looking at the unpicked child, 2/4 are boys. So the odds are 1/2, which logically makes sense. The fact that adding an irrelevant piece of information changes the number just proves the logic is WRONG. Always check your logic by sticking things in a vacuum. I.E., if I didn't know what the child's sex was, would the odds change? They shouldn't. If you tell me and I close my ears, the odds are still the same.
I was about ready to completely agree with you, since as a kid I use to look at random-dot stereograms and I have fantastic vision despite the fact the 4 other members of my family all need glasses. However, I then realized that 3d glasses are a trainer to get your brain to see 3d as opposed to something you control your muscles to do, so I don't think its quite the same. On the other hand, when looking at a 3d image you see a ghost of something in the fore-ground if you are looking at the background until you train yourself to focus on it, so maybe it would help in the manner you described.
The thing is, autism symptoms are a gradient. Its a big slippery slope of "wait a sec, but this person is basically the same except slightly better in this area". Some people have it to the extreme to where they really should just be thrown to the wolves while others are able to control and manage the symptoms to where nobody would know the difference. After learning about the symptoms and thinking about the difficulties I had growing up, I'm pretty sure I fit into the autistic spectrum disorder definition. I think the big thing about autism is obsessiveness combined with other "hints". Do I have tantrum fits? Yes, although curently they almost never happen and I never let them happen around people now. Am I obsessive? Yes, I can do things for hours and not get bored, constantly rewarded by the progress I make with what I am doing. Do I have bad social skills? Yes, I'm on slashdot, of course I do! However, I make friends a lot easier now that I understand that people judge friendliness by if I make an effort to smile or not.
And you know what? I also have tend to have bad breath that originates in from my stomach. So we'll see if this urine test actually works and maybe I don't have to run through the big checklist of symptoms anymore.
I actually wrote the local government entity that is in charge of designing and maintaining the highway system where I live (I forget what is called... its not the DOT) describing just this idea. They actually wrote back and said they were already implementing such a thing with cameras and a fiber-optic system.
They have two lights rigged up with cameras so far. The weird thing about these cameras is that they actually judge the speed of the last car and get him to run a yellow so that the light is green (or red depending on how you look at it) for minimum time. Really cool tech until your the motorcyclist behind that last car who isn't seen by the camera and find yourself either slamming your brakes or running a red light with a 50 mph cross street. Another con is that they will cycle the lights at blazing fast speeds if they don't see any cars coming from a direction for a while, even if it sees imminent traffic coming from the other direction, based on the assumption that maybe the camera malfunctioned. When it cycles the lights in this manner it is a 3 second yellow and green, which as you might imagine isn't nearly enough time to comfortably stop if your going 50 mph.
On the flip side, the cameras tend to see motorcyclists a lot more reliably than the magnetic inductance sensors detect them.
The problems with any intersection as it turns out is:
Unlimited traffic from one direction
Unknown traffic ratios
Traffic that is equally congested in both directions and people have plenty of reason to turn left from both sides
That third one is the biggest problem, because it makes running "green waves" up and down road harder, especially if you have a single cross-street that sees the same traffic density as the road in question.
His logic might be wrong but his actions might be right. Once everyone who would want an iPhone gets one then I think Apple's revenue is going to drop off. Apple looks like they are taking the Motorola route (remember the razor?). They had the great innovation and they are riding it but recent developments seem to indicate that they probably aren't going to be able to maintain that innovation. Apple continues to stubbornly demand money for everything while other companies are undercutting them with products that are catching up in terms of desirability. The iPad and the meager improvements to the iPhone seem to indicate that they've started to run out of must-have ideas.
So yes, if you think Apple's success is going to begin waning, then their high P/E ratio would indicate that its time to sell since you know they aren't going to grow much further. The naive traders and the automated trading algorithms that draw lines of best fit think Apple will grow into infinity but the wiser trader will learn when they could make a killing taking the contrarian perspective. That said, Apple and MS are both large cap stocks so I pretty much avoid them since they don't move enough for my tastes. Mid-cap stocks as a rule generally perform much better with slightly more risk.
If you watch a stock in real-time you can predict where it will move quite easily. Thanks to automated trading, you can just draw a line of best fit based on the stock's current direction and also determine a high and low amount of noise to where it will bounce around. Computer's have no idea how much a stock is worth, they just simply use these values to determine when to make a transaction and actually help self-perpetuate everything by being the major driving force behind a stock's movement. Changes in direction are caused by actual human intervention, such as a large buy order spaced out over several minutes.
For example, if an algorithm says "the high point is at $10.50", then when the stock gets that high it will sell the hell out of it until it bumps the price lower. Then when it says "the low point is $10.42", it buys the hell out of it again. However, if it notices an overall downward direction, it will reshift what it's idea of a high point and low point are as time progresses, helping to self-perpetuate that downward direction since it is probably one of many automated systems that work similarly and overwhelm actual human interaction with the stock price.
It's not necessarily a bad thing, if you realize this, then you can easily predict a stock's movement and make some easy income; knowing exactly where the low and high values are going to be at any point in time. Again, the only thing that causes a stock to change its movement is actual human interaction that results in the trend being broken.
I don't see anything wrong with that as long as they're not playing first-person shooter games, violent games, games with a lot of sexual or drug content.
So in other words, as long as they aren't fun games
Drives with TRIM don't really degrade that badly, its just the ones that don't support it or are running on an OS that doesn't support it (such as windows XP). They degrade because every time something is written something else has to be erased first (since the part eventually fills up all of its free space). The read performance doesn't degrade that much.
The problem is how flash has to be written to. You're only allowed to write ONCE to MLC flash pages and up to 4 times with SLC flash pages (in reality you can cheat a bit which some drive manufacturers might do but you are going beyond the manufacturer's specs and what they tested the flash at). Additionally, it's one-directional so changing a 0 back to a 1 requires erasing the whole block, and you're not allowed to program backwards in a block (so if you program page 1 you have to program page 2 next or erase the whole block). Keeping track of what is free and what isn't requires modifying the flash (or maybe in the future a separate PSRAM module). As you might guess, erasing a whole block to mark a single bit is inefficient and likewise so is wasting a whole block to indicate another block is in use is also inefficient. We haven't even gotten into wear leveling yet. Manufacturers end up splitting up the drive into larger segments and then using a bucket array hash table algorithm (as an example, I'm just guessing) to find free blocks and pages within those segments. Those larger segments are marked "completely full", "not completely full", and "empty". Finding what blocks and pages to put data is extremely tricky. So is debugging it. This stuff is slow, it takes weeks to thoroughly test a single drive, and if you update the firmware... guess what, another several weeks of testing.
All SSDs automatically do garbage collection (even those without TRIM), when they find the spare time, which is what defrag basically is. If it weren't for these garbage collection algorithms you would only be able to use a fraction of the drive's space before it ran out of free blocks. TRIM makes the garbage collection significantly more effective however.
This is why I use a different password on facebook than anywhere else.
Actually it was when my account started spamming wall postings with links to Chinese drug sites I changed my password to something unique, but still, virtually the same thing.
Because people don't RTFA to avoid giving advertising money to the sites linked, since it isn't uncommon to have the poster have a conflict of interest with the site being linked to...
I've seen that too actually, that's not the opposite effect. Imagine pressing the pedal, no response momentarily, then suddenly a strong lurch (on top of a strong lurch with a fast response). My biggest irk with this car is when it fricken downshifts when I want to coast down a hill in a 40 mph zone. Its like it assumes I'm some jerk who's always accelerating up to a stop sign then slamming on my brakes when I get to it, there are literally situations where the only way to maintain a speed are to use cruise control.
There isn't any. The acceleration mechanism is awkward, taking away some of the control from the user. Want to coast? Too bad, car downshifts, forcing you to give it gas. Want to give it a little gas and maintain 30 mph? Too bad, this is literally impossible on some cars without using cruise control. A slight tap accelerates to about 35 mph, a release downshifts to 15 mph.
I have a camry. Sometimes when I tap the accelerator after coasting or while stopped it unexpectedly accelerates harder than I expected despite pressing the pedal just a little bit, forcing me to take my foot off the pedal to avoid rear-ending the car in front of me. Thus, unintended acceleration. The cause is the neural network that "learns my driving style", which is what the car salesman told me was a feature of the car. Anyone who's worked with neural networks knows that sometimes, they aren't always right...
I mean really, how do I verify this though...? When someone complains "the car accelerated unintentionally" how do we know they didn't just have my experience, which is really minor.
Ok in all fairness, bubblesort is arguably the best sorting algorithm because in today's modern computing power it will do the job sufficiently for 99% of your problems and is easy to implement and verify. Its especially efficient when appending an already sorted array to another already sorted array, which some other popular algorithms can't claim.
And the naive solution to a shuffling an array is similar to bubblesort, traverse through the array and generate a random number up to array size to swap the element with. If current position + number > array size then deduct the array size from the number to get the position to swap with. Maybe I should patent that because it apparently isn't obvious.
I think I have to agree that this looks like a situation where an author, likely a young one, is trying to nerd off when they dont understand how Microsoft operates. My question is why would you go through this kind of effort in the first place...
Bingo, the odds of the Earth being habitable without there being a negative feedback loop is about zero. More heat = more evaporated water = more clouds in the stratosphere and more snow during the winter. It should also mean more wind, which would make the planet more temperate. Now is that mechanism strong enough to prevent temporary periods of rather large amounts of heat or cold? That is unknown. I wouldn't be surprised if there are a lot of other factors at work.
That's scary to think about, although realistically I think people just perceive time to be faster in retrospect and in reality they are just more patient and less fidgety as they get older. I'm sure our internal clocks do get slower as we age though.
Could also be that the speed of our internal clock is inversely proportional to the size of our brain and directly proportional to the effectiveness of its synapses.
I have a theory that "genetic momentum", for lack of a better term, exists. Its where you have genes that dictate what your children will have, sort of like code that writes its own code. This kind of phenomena would allow for, for example, giraffes to evolve fairly quickly because there would be a gene that gives their children a longer neck than themselves. This could be the function of what is known as "junk" DNA. Of course, I would like to know if anyone else has heard of something like this, and if it has been proven to exist or not.
Slashdot Mirror
This follows into the gambler's fallacy though; the idea that an event of the past determines the odds of a non-affected event of the future. (i.e. I rolled 1 3 times so the odds of rolling 1 must be less than it was before)
The real logic is:
Tuesday is irrelevant. The odds of the days being different carries no bearing towards the sex of the child. It would require more information for it to be meaningful (such as, they were born on different days of the week). In twins, it is possible that one child is born on one day and the other isn't. Likewise, it is possible to have twins of opposite sexes. Thus day is irrelevant here too.
The odds of picking children are (sex, birth order):
B1 B2 - picked first boy out of 2 boys
B2 B1 - picked second boy out of 2 boys
B1 G2 - picked first born child (boy) and left girl
B2 G1 - picked second born child (boy) and left girl
G1 G2 - not possible
G2 G1 - not possible
Eliminate the times when both are girls and you are given 4 choices, and looking at the unpicked child, 2/4 are boys. So the odds are 1/2, which logically makes sense. The fact that adding an irrelevant piece of information changes the number just proves the logic is WRONG. Always check your logic by sticking things in a vacuum. I.E., if I didn't know what the child's sex was, would the odds change? They shouldn't. If you tell me and I close my ears, the odds are still the same.
I was about ready to completely agree with you, since as a kid I use to look at random-dot stereograms and I have fantastic vision despite the fact the 4 other members of my family all need glasses. However, I then realized that 3d glasses are a trainer to get your brain to see 3d as opposed to something you control your muscles to do, so I don't think its quite the same. On the other hand, when looking at a 3d image you see a ghost of something in the fore-ground if you are looking at the background until you train yourself to focus on it, so maybe it would help in the manner you described.
Either way though, I don't buy that lazy eye BS.
The thing is, autism symptoms are a gradient. Its a big slippery slope of "wait a sec, but this person is basically the same except slightly better in this area". Some people have it to the extreme to where they really should just be thrown to the wolves while others are able to control and manage the symptoms to where nobody would know the difference. After learning about the symptoms and thinking about the difficulties I had growing up, I'm pretty sure I fit into the autistic spectrum disorder definition. I think the big thing about autism is obsessiveness combined with other "hints". Do I have tantrum fits? Yes, although curently they almost never happen and I never let them happen around people now. Am I obsessive? Yes, I can do things for hours and not get bored, constantly rewarded by the progress I make with what I am doing. Do I have bad social skills? Yes, I'm on slashdot, of course I do! However, I make friends a lot easier now that I understand that people judge friendliness by if I make an effort to smile or not.
And you know what? I also have tend to have bad breath that originates in from my stomach. So we'll see if this urine test actually works and maybe I don't have to run through the big checklist of symptoms anymore.
It may only be a temporary glitch, but it's one that's providing some pleasure for internet users in China.
Am I the only one who thinks this is a perverted sentence?
I actually wrote the local government entity that is in charge of designing and maintaining the highway system where I live (I forget what is called... its not the DOT) describing just this idea. They actually wrote back and said they were already implementing such a thing with cameras and a fiber-optic system.
They have two lights rigged up with cameras so far. The weird thing about these cameras is that they actually judge the speed of the last car and get him to run a yellow so that the light is green (or red depending on how you look at it) for minimum time. Really cool tech until your the motorcyclist behind that last car who isn't seen by the camera and find yourself either slamming your brakes or running a red light with a 50 mph cross street. Another con is that they will cycle the lights at blazing fast speeds if they don't see any cars coming from a direction for a while, even if it sees imminent traffic coming from the other direction, based on the assumption that maybe the camera malfunctioned. When it cycles the lights in this manner it is a 3 second yellow and green, which as you might imagine isn't nearly enough time to comfortably stop if your going 50 mph.
On the flip side, the cameras tend to see motorcyclists a lot more reliably than the magnetic inductance sensors detect them.
The problems with any intersection as it turns out is:
Unlimited traffic from one direction
Unknown traffic ratios
Traffic that is equally congested in both directions and people have plenty of reason to turn left from both sides
That third one is the biggest problem, because it makes running "green waves" up and down road harder, especially if you have a single cross-street that sees the same traffic density as the road in question.
His logic might be wrong but his actions might be right. Once everyone who would want an iPhone gets one then I think Apple's revenue is going to drop off. Apple looks like they are taking the Motorola route (remember the razor?). They had the great innovation and they are riding it but recent developments seem to indicate that they probably aren't going to be able to maintain that innovation. Apple continues to stubbornly demand money for everything while other companies are undercutting them with products that are catching up in terms of desirability. The iPad and the meager improvements to the iPhone seem to indicate that they've started to run out of must-have ideas.
So yes, if you think Apple's success is going to begin waning, then their high P/E ratio would indicate that its time to sell since you know they aren't going to grow much further. The naive traders and the automated trading algorithms that draw lines of best fit think Apple will grow into infinity but the wiser trader will learn when they could make a killing taking the contrarian perspective. That said, Apple and MS are both large cap stocks so I pretty much avoid them since they don't move enough for my tastes. Mid-cap stocks as a rule generally perform much better with slightly more risk.
If you watch a stock in real-time you can predict where it will move quite easily. Thanks to automated trading, you can just draw a line of best fit based on the stock's current direction and also determine a high and low amount of noise to where it will bounce around. Computer's have no idea how much a stock is worth, they just simply use these values to determine when to make a transaction and actually help self-perpetuate everything by being the major driving force behind a stock's movement. Changes in direction are caused by actual human intervention, such as a large buy order spaced out over several minutes.
For example, if an algorithm says "the high point is at $10.50", then when the stock gets that high it will sell the hell out of it until it bumps the price lower. Then when it says "the low point is $10.42", it buys the hell out of it again. However, if it notices an overall downward direction, it will reshift what it's idea of a high point and low point are as time progresses, helping to self-perpetuate that downward direction since it is probably one of many automated systems that work similarly and overwhelm actual human interaction with the stock price.
It's not necessarily a bad thing, if you realize this, then you can easily predict a stock's movement and make some easy income; knowing exactly where the low and high values are going to be at any point in time. Again, the only thing that causes a stock to change its movement is actual human interaction that results in the trend being broken.
Yeah the graphics card I got from walmart that is in my wife's computer was BFG.
Maybe there's the profit problem right there
I don't see anything wrong with that as long as they're not playing first-person shooter games, violent games, games with a lot of sexual or drug content.
So in other words, as long as they aren't fun games
Apparently my religion leaves brown racing stripes on my underwear
Drives with TRIM don't really degrade that badly, its just the ones that don't support it or are running on an OS that doesn't support it (such as windows XP). They degrade because every time something is written something else has to be erased first (since the part eventually fills up all of its free space). The read performance doesn't degrade that much.
my wii makes a great dust collector now. I wouldn't be surprised if your statement comes true in more ways than one.
The problem is how flash has to be written to. You're only allowed to write ONCE to MLC flash pages and up to 4 times with SLC flash pages (in reality you can cheat a bit which some drive manufacturers might do but you are going beyond the manufacturer's specs and what they tested the flash at). Additionally, it's one-directional so changing a 0 back to a 1 requires erasing the whole block, and you're not allowed to program backwards in a block (so if you program page 1 you have to program page 2 next or erase the whole block). Keeping track of what is free and what isn't requires modifying the flash (or maybe in the future a separate PSRAM module). As you might guess, erasing a whole block to mark a single bit is inefficient and likewise so is wasting a whole block to indicate another block is in use is also inefficient. We haven't even gotten into wear leveling yet. Manufacturers end up splitting up the drive into larger segments and then using a bucket array hash table algorithm (as an example, I'm just guessing) to find free blocks and pages within those segments. Those larger segments are marked "completely full", "not completely full", and "empty". Finding what blocks and pages to put data is extremely tricky. So is debugging it. This stuff is slow, it takes weeks to thoroughly test a single drive, and if you update the firmware... guess what, another several weeks of testing.
All SSDs automatically do garbage collection (even those without TRIM), when they find the spare time, which is what defrag basically is. If it weren't for these garbage collection algorithms you would only be able to use a fraction of the drive's space before it ran out of free blocks. TRIM makes the garbage collection significantly more effective however.
When your prototype fails its a lot safer at 6 feet than 8000.
This is why I use a different password on facebook than anywhere else.
Actually it was when my account started spamming wall postings with links to Chinese drug sites I changed my password to something unique, but still, virtually the same thing.
Because people don't RTFA to avoid giving advertising money to the sites linked, since it isn't uncommon to have the poster have a conflict of interest with the site being linked to...
I've seen that too actually, that's not the opposite effect. Imagine pressing the pedal, no response momentarily, then suddenly a strong lurch (on top of a strong lurch with a fast response). My biggest irk with this car is when it fricken downshifts when I want to coast down a hill in a 40 mph zone. Its like it assumes I'm some jerk who's always accelerating up to a stop sign then slamming on my brakes when I get to it, there are literally situations where the only way to maintain a speed are to use cruise control.
There isn't any. The acceleration mechanism is awkward, taking away some of the control from the user. Want to coast? Too bad, car downshifts, forcing you to give it gas. Want to give it a little gas and maintain 30 mph? Too bad, this is literally impossible on some cars without using cruise control. A slight tap accelerates to about 35 mph, a release downshifts to 15 mph.
I have a camry. Sometimes when I tap the accelerator after coasting or while stopped it unexpectedly accelerates harder than I expected despite pressing the pedal just a little bit, forcing me to take my foot off the pedal to avoid rear-ending the car in front of me. Thus, unintended acceleration. The cause is the neural network that "learns my driving style", which is what the car salesman told me was a feature of the car. Anyone who's worked with neural networks knows that sometimes, they aren't always right...
I mean really, how do I verify this though...? When someone complains "the car accelerated unintentionally" how do we know they didn't just have my experience, which is really minor.
Ok in all fairness, bubblesort is arguably the best sorting algorithm because in today's modern computing power it will do the job sufficiently for 99% of your problems and is easy to implement and verify. Its especially efficient when appending an already sorted array to another already sorted array, which some other popular algorithms can't claim.
And the naive solution to a shuffling an array is similar to bubblesort, traverse through the array and generate a random number up to array size to swap the element with. If current position + number > array size then deduct the array size from the number to get the position to swap with. Maybe I should patent that because it apparently isn't obvious.
I think I have to agree that this looks like a situation where an author, likely a young one, is trying to nerd off when they dont understand how Microsoft operates. My question is why would you go through this kind of effort in the first place...
metamodding would fix that problem wouldn't it?
Bingo, the odds of the Earth being habitable without there being a negative feedback loop is about zero. More heat = more evaporated water = more clouds in the stratosphere and more snow during the winter. It should also mean more wind, which would make the planet more temperate. Now is that mechanism strong enough to prevent temporary periods of rather large amounts of heat or cold? That is unknown. I wouldn't be surprised if there are a lot of other factors at work.
Likewise, does it get wet?
That's scary to think about, although realistically I think people just perceive time to be faster in retrospect and in reality they are just more patient and less fidgety as they get older. I'm sure our internal clocks do get slower as we age though.
Could also be that the speed of our internal clock is inversely proportional to the size of our brain and directly proportional to the effectiveness of its synapses.
I have a theory that "genetic momentum", for lack of a better term, exists. Its where you have genes that dictate what your children will have, sort of like code that writes its own code. This kind of phenomena would allow for, for example, giraffes to evolve fairly quickly because there would be a gene that gives their children a longer neck than themselves. This could be the function of what is known as "junk" DNA. Of course, I would like to know if anyone else has heard of something like this, and if it has been proven to exist or not.