But that is a whole level of stupid. It's 2015 - we should be able to easily manage a manned trip to a La Grange point (or a telepresence trip with a suitable robot to a La Grange - frankly the payload requirements would be similar for both).
We should be able to slingshot, if not bother landing, on the moon easily. The benefits of having that capability in terms of orbital instrumentation would be immense.
The real issue is and remains the endemic corruption in the entire affair. After all that money and all those laid off workers (for circumstances basically entirely outside of their control) and foreclosures and what not, nothing has really been changed. New regulation is being opposed and hounded down - visibly by the Republicans but you'd be joking if you thought that wasn't happening because the Democrats are mysteriously gunshy about pushing it.
There are no changes to executive salaries, top-tier tax rates, even simple things like removing the Bush tax cuts or the distribution of bonuses (which happened to the tune of millions IN THE SAME YEAR THOSE INSTITUTIONS WERE BAILED OUT BY THE GOVERNMENT).
American taxes, especially on corporations, are the lowest they've been in 50 years. Yet unemployment is now at one of the highest levels in recent history. Despite the Bush tax cuts, the unemployment rate did not appreciably drop - and despite the Bush tax cuts, unemployment now remains high.
If taxes are preventing job creation, then lowering taxes by any amount should reduce unemployment since some jobs which were formerly unprofitable will now be profitable and ergo companies will hire people to fill them.
Clearly then we should raise taxes on all these people until they have a comparable standard of living.
I mean is this your goal: if you hadn't noticed, rich people don't go and live the high life in India either. In case you hadn't noticed rampant poverty tends to have other, follow on effects, which make life worse for the non-impoverished as well. I mean, I guess you clearly must pull in enough money to afford some private security and a bulletproof SUV in case their's a kidnapping attempt on your way to work.
Nevermind that the entire example is saying "screw everyone else, I want even more money at the expense of the country". Welcome to the modern American aristocracy.
Or are a victim of a sexual assault. Or suffer a needlestick injury as a doctor treating someone with HIV (or have incidental blood-blood contact through say broken skin). Or if your partner of 10 years cheats on you. Or if the condom fails.
Not really. To breed resistant strains of anything you need to have survivors. For example, the big problem with antibiotic resistant tuberculosis is people being non-compliant with their antibiotic regimes. So they get it, take the course for a few weeks or so and feel better, and then decide to stop taking the pills or start being lazy about keeping up to the schedule (which is 6-24 months).
As a result, they haven't actually cleared the entire infection, instead they've neatly selected for the slightly more antibiotic resistant strains of TB, which they may end up passing off into the general population if they become infectious again.
TB is particularly prone to this since it's difficult to treat in the first case (somewhat antibiotic resistant by nature, requiring prolonged treatments). It is much, much harder to develop resistance when you wipe out the entire population of something in one hit since there are no survivors to reproduce a new resistant strain.
Uh, the HPV vaccine IS for the types of HPV that cause cancer. That's the entire point of the vaccination program. It is not a cure for all possible types of cervical cancer (only ~60% of them) but the HPV strains it vaccinates against are those linked to cancer + some other common ones (to encourage men to get the vaccine too and thus promote herd immunity).
50% of people filing federal income tax returns in the US don't pay any net money into federal income taxes. They do however pay state-imposed taxes, sale's taxes, stamp duties on property transactions, payroll taxes (via their work) etc.
You might want to learn more about your own tax system's functioning.
The problem was solved within the context of a university driven research project (Foldit) which was geared towards finding out if humans could be more efficient then computer algorithms in finding protein folding solutions. Gamification in action but this isn't breaking any research paradigms.
This just goes to confirm what that project already discovered though: that humans are still somewhat better at this type of problem solving then computers, with the postulated reason being that we're much more resistant to getting stuck in localized minima: i.e. if we can see two pieces almost fit together, but won't get any closer, a person is willing to unravel large parts of their solution to try and get it closer whereas it's very difficult to write a good algorithm which will do the same.
The point still stands though - super-low power consumption has to be an active area of research for them since we've been at about the maximum manageable power consumption by a CPU for a while now. Increases in transistor counts need to accompany decreases in power consumption per transistor.
What is the major mental deficit that leads to a bunch of people hearing that Intel in a demonstration indoors in a conference hall used a 60W light bulb to power there demo low powered CPU, concluding that obviously Intel are saying that under normal circumstances you would use a 60W light bulb to power said processor.
This isn't really something Intel can do optionally though. With the rate power consumption of CPU cores has been increasing, they need to do something about it pretty much now since it's not going to be possible to air-heatsink that much heat if it keeps going up.
I replaced a bad network cable recently which was dropping my Samba transfers over a gigE port to under 1 mbit/sec but had iperf showing ~200 mbit/sec in tests. There's also some issue with Realtek network drivers in Windows (you need to install them from the website) and a similar problem with Ubuntu picking up the wrong driver for some of the chipsets on Linux.
Yeah that thing is a lot like the thing we build a few times a week in my lab. It'll work great in one specific set of problems, and have to be expensively re-engineered to deal with anything else (electrochemistry is appalling difficult to do well).
Which rather defeats the entire purpose of the exercise, which is that it's expensive and time-consuming to figure out what every single part is made out of - obviously if you dump everything in some strong acids and alkalis you could break it all down to near elemental form, but there goes any hope of doing this in a profitable fashion.
Conversely having a house which could temporarily float when flood waters are abnormally high might save a lot in damages for places built on floodplains, not to mention lives.
I did all my low-level math classes on a tablet PC. Eventually I've given up on tablets (not sturdy enough yet) but it was enormously useful in class. Of course the most immediate thing I noticed was in fact how useless the act of copying notes from a board to a computer was in the first place: amongst other things, it's possible to write an incredible amount down and not actually have any clue what you've been writing since it just becomes letters and shapes and don't fall behind or you won't get everything!
Imagining a class where the content comes to students up close (reading those boards from a distance is pretty much impossible sometimes), maybe where the problem the professor solves up front can be shown side-by-side to a randomly generated analog at the same time?
The biggest problem with educational technology is that getting people technology is the start, not the end, of the process.
In a subject like mathematics, digital content should mean that we can improve the way people practice and learn various skills dramatically. "Worked examples" should be able to be generated more or less arbitrarily and randomly. The ability to record and monitor pretty much *everything* about the way a student solves a particular problem means that generating statistics, or doing pattern matching on the types of things which commonly trip them up becomes possible.
This is all the type of stuff the Kahn academy is trying to do, and it's one of the best approaches to the problem I've seen.
Pile on top of that the fact that, if you consider the billions of man-hours that go into teaching and explaining the same concepts time and time again, it is almost criminal that most students are stuck having complex concepts explained to them in one way, from one source (not to mention, if that doesn't click for them, our methods of dealing with that are absurd).
Damn those moochers and their refrigerators! How dare people claim to be poor if they have access to 19th century technology!
Here's a game for you: look at all your "luxuries" around your house. Now see how much they sell for on eBay. Now compare that number to the amount of money you spend per month on basic necessities.
How long does liquidating everything you have in the world allow you to survive?
Which would be why you should teach algebra, not math.
Being able to manipulate a base-whatever numbering system mentally, and actually understanding why numbers interact the way they do, are two very different things. Excessive focus on the number side of things obfuscates the actual important stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
Well sadly the answer is "we do nothing" in 2015.
But that is a whole level of stupid. It's 2015 - we should be able to easily manage a manned trip to a La Grange point (or a telepresence trip with a suitable robot to a La Grange - frankly the payload requirements would be similar for both).
We should be able to slingshot, if not bother landing, on the moon easily. The benefits of having that capability in terms of orbital instrumentation would be immense.
The real issue is and remains the endemic corruption in the entire affair. After all that money and all those laid off workers (for circumstances basically entirely outside of their control) and foreclosures and what not, nothing has really been changed. New regulation is being opposed and hounded down - visibly by the Republicans but you'd be joking if you thought that wasn't happening because the Democrats are mysteriously gunshy about pushing it.
There are no changes to executive salaries, top-tier tax rates, even simple things like removing the Bush tax cuts or the distribution of bonuses (which happened to the tune of millions IN THE SAME YEAR THOSE INSTITUTIONS WERE BAILED OUT BY THE GOVERNMENT).
Isn't this the opposite problem?
i.e. when you repartition an advanced format drive, there's a decent chance you'll align the partition off a 4K boundary and thus kill performance.
It's cities also have big problems with family planning and their growth rates.
You have just advocated supply-side economics.
Some problems with it:
American taxes, especially on corporations, are the lowest they've been in 50 years. Yet unemployment is now at one of the highest levels in recent history. Despite the Bush tax cuts, the unemployment rate did not appreciably drop - and despite the Bush tax cuts, unemployment now remains high.
If taxes are preventing job creation, then lowering taxes by any amount should reduce unemployment since some jobs which were formerly unprofitable will now be profitable and ergo companies will hire people to fill them.
Yet this has not happened. Why?
Clearly then we should raise taxes on all these people until they have a comparable standard of living.
I mean is this your goal: if you hadn't noticed, rich people don't go and live the high life in India either. In case you hadn't noticed rampant poverty tends to have other, follow on effects, which make life worse for the non-impoverished as well. I mean, I guess you clearly must pull in enough money to afford some private security and a bulletproof SUV in case their's a kidnapping attempt on your way to work.
It's almost like supply-side economics is complete crap.
Nevermind that the entire example is saying "screw everyone else, I want even more money at the expense of the country". Welcome to the modern American aristocracy.
Or are a victim of a sexual assault. Or suffer a needlestick injury as a doctor treating someone with HIV (or have incidental blood-blood contact through say broken skin). Or if your partner of 10 years cheats on you. Or if the condom fails.
That must be why Africa has so few problems with overpopulation oh wai---
Not really. To breed resistant strains of anything you need to have survivors. For example, the big problem with antibiotic resistant tuberculosis is people being non-compliant with their antibiotic regimes. So they get it, take the course for a few weeks or so and feel better, and then decide to stop taking the pills or start being lazy about keeping up to the schedule (which is 6-24 months).
As a result, they haven't actually cleared the entire infection, instead they've neatly selected for the slightly more antibiotic resistant strains of TB, which they may end up passing off into the general population if they become infectious again.
TB is particularly prone to this since it's difficult to treat in the first case (somewhat antibiotic resistant by nature, requiring prolonged treatments). It is much, much harder to develop resistance when you wipe out the entire population of something in one hit since there are no survivors to reproduce a new resistant strain.
Uh, the HPV vaccine IS for the types of HPV that cause cancer. That's the entire point of the vaccination program. It is not a cure for all possible types of cervical cancer (only ~60% of them) but the HPV strains it vaccinates against are those linked to cancer + some other common ones (to encourage men to get the vaccine too and thus promote herd immunity).
50% of people filing federal income tax returns in the US don't pay any net money into federal income taxes. They do however pay state-imposed taxes, sale's taxes, stamp duties on property transactions, payroll taxes (via their work) etc.
You might want to learn more about your own tax system's functioning.
The problem was solved within the context of a university driven research project (Foldit) which was geared towards finding out if humans could be more efficient then computer algorithms in finding protein folding solutions. Gamification in action but this isn't breaking any research paradigms.
This just goes to confirm what that project already discovered though: that humans are still somewhat better at this type of problem solving then computers, with the postulated reason being that we're much more resistant to getting stuck in localized minima: i.e. if we can see two pieces almost fit together, but won't get any closer, a person is willing to unravel large parts of their solution to try and get it closer whereas it's very difficult to write a good algorithm which will do the same.
The point still stands though - super-low power consumption has to be an active area of research for them since we've been at about the maximum manageable power consumption by a CPU for a while now. Increases in transistor counts need to accompany decreases in power consumption per transistor.
What is the major mental deficit that leads to a bunch of people hearing that Intel in a demonstration indoors in a conference hall used a 60W light bulb to power there demo low powered CPU, concluding that obviously Intel are saying that under normal circumstances you would use a 60W light bulb to power said processor.
This isn't really something Intel can do optionally though. With the rate power consumption of CPU cores has been increasing, they need to do something about it pretty much now since it's not going to be possible to air-heatsink that much heat if it keeps going up.
A couple hundred is worth looking into.
I replaced a bad network cable recently which was dropping my Samba transfers over a gigE port to under 1 mbit/sec but had iperf showing ~200 mbit/sec in tests. There's also some issue with Realtek network drivers in Windows (you need to install them from the website) and a similar problem with Ubuntu picking up the wrong driver for some of the chipsets on Linux.
Yeah that thing is a lot like the thing we build a few times a week in my lab. It'll work great in one specific set of problems, and have to be expensively re-engineered to deal with anything else (electrochemistry is appalling difficult to do well).
Which rather defeats the entire purpose of the exercise, which is that it's expensive and time-consuming to figure out what every single part is made out of - obviously if you dump everything in some strong acids and alkalis you could break it all down to near elemental form, but there goes any hope of doing this in a profitable fashion.
Depends a lot on how you did this. I can get 940+ mbit between my Linux server and my desktop PC no problems but that's using iperf.
That said, Samba seems pretty fast since my file transfers spike to 100 mbyte / sec until some cache clears and I drop back down to 60-70 mbyte / sec.
Conversely having a house which could temporarily float when flood waters are abnormally high might save a lot in damages for places built on floodplains, not to mention lives.
I did all my low-level math classes on a tablet PC. Eventually I've given up on tablets (not sturdy enough yet) but it was enormously useful in class. Of course the most immediate thing I noticed was in fact how useless the act of copying notes from a board to a computer was in the first place: amongst other things, it's possible to write an incredible amount down and not actually have any clue what you've been writing since it just becomes letters and shapes and don't fall behind or you won't get everything!
Imagining a class where the content comes to students up close (reading those boards from a distance is pretty much impossible sometimes), maybe where the problem the professor solves up front can be shown side-by-side to a randomly generated analog at the same time?
The biggest problem with educational technology is that getting people technology is the start, not the end, of the process.
In a subject like mathematics, digital content should mean that we can improve the way people practice and learn various skills dramatically. "Worked examples" should be able to be generated more or less arbitrarily and randomly. The ability to record and monitor pretty much *everything* about the way a student solves a particular problem means that generating statistics, or doing pattern matching on the types of things which commonly trip them up becomes possible.
This is all the type of stuff the Kahn academy is trying to do, and it's one of the best approaches to the problem I've seen.
Pile on top of that the fact that, if you consider the billions of man-hours that go into teaching and explaining the same concepts time and time again, it is almost criminal that most students are stuck having complex concepts explained to them in one way, from one source (not to mention, if that doesn't click for them, our methods of dealing with that are absurd).
Damn those moochers and their refrigerators! How dare people claim to be poor if they have access to 19th century technology!
Here's a game for you: look at all your "luxuries" around your house. Now see how much they sell for on eBay. Now compare that number to the amount of money you spend per month on basic necessities.
How long does liquidating everything you have in the world allow you to survive?
Which would be why you should teach algebra, not math.
Being able to manipulate a base-whatever numbering system mentally, and actually understanding why numbers interact the way they do, are two very different things. Excessive focus on the number side of things obfuscates the actual important stuff.