It would have been nice if the summary had stated what OMB stands for somewhere (Office of Management and Budget). I was trying to figure out if it was some wacky new term for Obama or his administration.
It would have been nice if the summary had stated what OMB stands for somewhere (Office of Management and Budget). I was trying to figure out if it was some wacky new term for Obama or his administration.
This has been modded "funny", but seriously, no-one outside the US is going to know this.
A lot of people inside the US don't immediately know what OMB stands for either.
So the system called Jaguar was powered by multiple XK6 engines. If they're upgrading it to take the title of world's fastest, they should have stuck with that pattern and called the new system the XJ220.
Ichthyosaurs are not dinosaurs. They are swimming reptiles and just like the pterosaurs and pleisiosaurs they are not dinosaurs. Calling an ichthyosaur a dinosaur is somewhat like calling a bat a rodent.
Usually malls are private property. Owners generally have the right to dictate behavior on their property. You have the right to forbid people from taking pictures when you allow them into your own place of residence if you so choose, mall owners have the same right.
Now, standing across the street on the sidewalk, taking a picture of the mall, would likely be a permissible activity from public property. But the law doesn't usually force property owners to allow people on their property to do any specific activity.
Re:Probably neither party with Democratic leanings
on
Facebook Forming a PAC
·
· Score: 1
In 2008, Zuckerberg hosted Obama.
That could have just as well been a PR stunt for him. That, and he wasn't worth quite as much money then, either. But really, if you are trying to draw attention to your company and you have a choice between a geriatric white guy or the first black guy to win the presidential endorsement from a major party in our country, the choice is obvious.
According to open secrets, Facebook employees support Democrats 97% of the time. But Zuckerberg personally hadn't donated enough to show up on the Fed's radar in 2008 or 2010.
I would advise against confusing facebook employees and their politics with those of the head of facebook. I haven't heard of any other billionaires from that company.
Not to say that we couldn't use more medical and dental professionals, but we sure as hell don't need any more lawyers. Somewhere in between there should be a happy medium.
People without subscriptions are often prevented from reading taxpayer funded research
Is true for very little current research.
You're simply wrong about this. True the NIH requires submission to open access journals
The NIH is the largest single funding source for scientific research from the US government.
there are non-U.S. sources
If the money comes from outside the US then how is it taxpayer funded?
Even in the U.S. there are the departments of defense, education, and energy which fund huge amounts of research
And they will likely end up following the NIH lead on the matter. It may take some time, but they will most likely go the same way. Regardless, the total research budget for ED and DoE is small in comparison to the NIH. Department of Defense is a different animal altogether, and often does research that doesn't end in publication anyways.
On top of that you have state universities that are funded (less and less) by tax dollars from their states. They often support the research of their faculty with that money
Which doesn't really counter my point. As you stated the state universities are constantly finding themselves with less and less state money. On top of that many state universities first fund the labs for startup and basic expenses; the money is often paying more to keep the lights on and the lab supplied with basic consumables than to do actual research.
Take a look at the top journals in many fields. We are very, very far from free access to scientific research.
That is a different problem as well. The article is discussing what Princeton University is doing with regards to copyright and publication access. My point is that they have just done what the NIH did back in '09. Really, what they have just done is redundant for many of their research faculty.
However, copyright being what it is, we can't do much of anything about older research. We can, however, take action about ongoing work, which is what the NIH already did, and what Princeton is now copying.
This is a bold first step in changing the face of how research (especially when taxpayer funded) works in the country, and a step towards weakening the current culture of charging increasingly exorbitant prices to view academic research publications.
However for some time now all work funded by new and renewed grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are required to be published in publicly accessible journals. It has been this way now for over two years, and the National Science Foundation (NSF) has implemented a similar policy for work they fund.
So while it is nice to see Princeton, as an academic institution, take a similar stance, it is mostly redundant as the vast majority of taxpayer-funded research - at least that funded by US taxpayers - is already covered by the policies of the two largest funding agencies.
Taxpayer-funded research - specifically that funded by the NIH (though I heard the NSF has or will follow) - is now required as a term of the grant to have its results written up in journals that are accessible without payment.
This of course applies only to grants that were awarded starting a couple years ago. However renewed grants are subject to this as well, and of course any new grants are automatically subject to this.
Hence contrary to the summary,
People without subscriptions are often prevented from reading taxpayer funded research
Representative Inglis became former representative Inglis when he lost in the GOP primary in 2010 to run for re-election. That is what political parties tend to do to people who think on their own...
Good for the lawyers. Not very good for everyone else.
That's what we get for making so many lawyers in this country. People bitch about how med schools and dental schools "don't make enough doctors/dentists". Law schools make absurd surpluses of lawyers and now we see what happens when we have too many of them. The lawyers aren't getting enough business from people, so they have to find new ways to keep themselves busy by suing each other.
Not to say that we couldn't use more medical and dental professionals, but we sure as hell don't need any more lawyers. Somewhere in between there should be a happy medium.
The page linked to by this summary did not explain why the patent trolls are going after the users of WiFi devices, rather than vendors. This seems like a notable change from the usual strategy of patent holders; after all the places mentioned are making little - if any - money off of their use of WiFi devices.
You were in "$%&! my dad says" (I probably misspelled that) and now it seems to have gone away. What do you feel caused it to fail, and why did you chose to do that?
In many cases, yes. However this time the AC led off with a first post that could well have come from general ignorance. Many people still fear openoffice, and show that level of complete lack of understanding. There are many people around here who still think that openoffice is a java-dependent product of Sun Microsystems that is determined to takeover your entire desktop and consume absurd amounts of resources in order to do the simplest of imaginable tasks.
So this time, the jury is out. The AC may well have been trolling, though in this case it is equally probable they just simply were ignorant.
While working on the spreadsheet format...
on
ODF 1.2 Is Approved
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
It would have been great to see them do some work towards importing excel macros into openoffice. Obviously there are ample good reasons not to do it; but plenty of reasons in favor of it as well. And really, anything that encourages MSOffice -> openoffice migration should get some attention, IMHO.
Quite simply, I have no problem with the album. I see nothing partisan about science. Science is supposed to be neutral and interested only in facts.
I pose the question moreso because a certain hyperconservative hack from slashdot (who doesn't hang around here much anymore) took great offense at the album. I figure he was not alone, and I was wondering how many others might have felt the same way. Considering the wasp's nest of conservatism that slashdot has become, I would suspect that question may be rather popular here.
Some of your fans felt that the album "here comes the science" was pushing a specific agenda that was never previously a part of your music. Do you feel that the (perceived) partisan tones on that album are real or imagined, and if they are real do they reflect a change in the attitudes of TMBG as a band or the individual members thereof?
I know, it is hard to fathom that anyone would not have an account, but I have intentionally avoided it myself. However since I do appear to be the only person left in the world who doesn't have one, there is bound to be something that someone who knows me has posted that relates to me.
Is it possible to request it? After all, if a user requests all the info that facebook as on them, and all they give them is the information that they posted, that is - to be kind - a very incomplete version of the data set.
The reason people are afraid of math is usually around the time they get an 8th grade math teacher, you know, after all the easy stuff is over and they get boring Mr. so and so who will explode your brain with geometry, algebra and trig that he barely understands himself. You know, the guy who actually has negative creativity and sucks it out of anyone he speaks to. The guy who is capable of putting students to sleep from across campus. Yeah, that guy. It then becomes a case of learn the formula, try to pass the test, another term over with, rinse, repeat.
Poor instruction is one component, for sure. However you failed to mention another one that is equally important in students' attitudes toward math.
Parents.
Children of math-phobes tend to almost invariably grow up to be math-phobes themselves. Children whose parents got away with failing math will be allowed to fail math as well. Their parents saw it as scary and meaningless, so they will see it the same. The greatest math teachers in the world can't teach math to someone who comes in the room believing they can't learn it.
Slashdot Mirror
I just rebooted my berry early yesterday for the first time in several months. I then went ahead and installed all the available software updates.
I'll try to do software updates at less important times next time.
It would have been nice if the summary had stated what OMB stands for somewhere (Office of Management and Budget). I was trying to figure out if it was some wacky new term for Obama or his administration.
Wait, you mean it isn't Obama's Money Bomb?
It would have been nice if the summary had stated what OMB stands for somewhere (Office of Management and Budget). I was trying to figure out if it was some wacky new term for Obama or his administration.
This has been modded "funny", but seriously, no-one outside the US is going to know this.
A lot of people inside the US don't immediately know what OMB stands for either.
... when the news pointed out recently that all the drone video surveillance footage is sent unencrypted? I know I found that a little surprising.
So the system called Jaguar was powered by multiple XK6 engines. If they're upgrading it to take the title of world's fastest, they should have stuck with that pattern and called the new system the XJ220.
Ichthyosaurs are not dinosaurs. They are swimming reptiles and just like the pterosaurs and pleisiosaurs they are not dinosaurs. Calling an ichthyosaur a dinosaur is somewhat like calling a bat a rodent.
Usually malls are private property. Owners generally have the right to dictate behavior on their property. You have the right to forbid people from taking pictures when you allow them into your own place of residence if you so choose, mall owners have the same right.
Now, standing across the street on the sidewalk, taking a picture of the mall, would likely be a permissible activity from public property. But the law doesn't usually force property owners to allow people on their property to do any specific activity.
There was an interesting story recently about someone who ran into similar problems at the Mall of America, as well.
In 2008, Zuckerberg hosted Obama.
That could have just as well been a PR stunt for him. That, and he wasn't worth quite as much money then, either. But really, if you are trying to draw attention to your company and you have a choice between a geriatric white guy or the first black guy to win the presidential endorsement from a major party in our country, the choice is obvious.
According to open secrets, Facebook employees support Democrats 97% of the time. But Zuckerberg personally hadn't donated enough to show up on the Fed's radar in 2008 or 2010.
I would advise against confusing facebook employees and their politics with those of the head of facebook. I haven't heard of any other billionaires from that company.
After all, Facebook boy would probably happily spend millions to get his federal income taxes - all $300.18 that he paid - refunded to him.
Not to say that we couldn't use more medical and dental professionals, but we sure as hell don't need any more lawyers. Somewhere in between there should be a happy medium.
Like... some kind of... dentist lawer?
We already tried that experiment, it didn't work out very well.
People without subscriptions are often prevented from reading taxpayer funded research
Is true for very little current research.
You're simply wrong about this. True the NIH requires submission to open access journals
The NIH is the largest single funding source for scientific research from the US government.
there are non-U.S. sources
If the money comes from outside the US then how is it taxpayer funded?
Even in the U.S. there are the departments of defense, education, and energy which fund huge amounts of research
And they will likely end up following the NIH lead on the matter. It may take some time, but they will most likely go the same way. Regardless, the total research budget for ED and DoE is small in comparison to the NIH. Department of Defense is a different animal altogether, and often does research that doesn't end in publication anyways.
On top of that you have state universities that are funded (less and less) by tax dollars from their states. They often support the research of their faculty with that money
Which doesn't really counter my point. As you stated the state universities are constantly finding themselves with less and less state money. On top of that many state universities first fund the labs for startup and basic expenses; the money is often paying more to keep the lights on and the lab supplied with basic consumables than to do actual research.
Take a look at the top journals in many fields. We are very, very far from free access to scientific research.
That is a different problem as well. The article is discussing what Princeton University is doing with regards to copyright and publication access. My point is that they have just done what the NIH did back in '09. Really, what they have just done is redundant for many of their research faculty.
However, copyright being what it is, we can't do much of anything about older research. We can, however, take action about ongoing work, which is what the NIH already did, and what Princeton is now copying.
This is a bold first step in changing the face of how research (especially when taxpayer funded) works in the country, and a step towards weakening the current culture of charging increasingly exorbitant prices to view academic research publications.
However for some time now all work funded by new and renewed grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are required to be published in publicly accessible journals. It has been this way now for over two years, and the National Science Foundation (NSF) has implemented a similar policy for work they fund.
So while it is nice to see Princeton, as an academic institution, take a similar stance, it is mostly redundant as the vast majority of taxpayer-funded research - at least that funded by US taxpayers - is already covered by the policies of the two largest funding agencies.
This of course applies only to grants that were awarded starting a couple years ago. However renewed grants are subject to this as well, and of course any new grants are automatically subject to this.
Hence contrary to the summary,
People without subscriptions are often prevented from reading taxpayer funded research
Is true for very little current research.
Representative Inglis became former representative Inglis when he lost in the GOP primary in 2010 to run for re-election. That is what political parties tend to do to people who think on their own...
Good for the lawyers. Not very good for everyone else.
That's what we get for making so many lawyers in this country. People bitch about how med schools and dental schools "don't make enough doctors/dentists". Law schools make absurd surpluses of lawyers and now we see what happens when we have too many of them. The lawyers aren't getting enough business from people, so they have to find new ways to keep themselves busy by suing each other.
Not to say that we couldn't use more medical and dental professionals, but we sure as hell don't need any more lawyers. Somewhere in between there should be a happy medium.
The page linked to by this summary did not explain why the patent trolls are going after the users of WiFi devices, rather than vendors. This seems like a notable change from the usual strategy of patent holders; after all the places mentioned are making little - if any - money off of their use of WiFi devices.
You were in "$%&! my dad says" (I probably misspelled that) and now it seems to have gone away. What do you feel caused it to fail, and why did you chose to do that?
(Or am I feeding a troll?)
In many cases, yes. However this time the AC led off with a first post that could well have come from general ignorance. Many people still fear openoffice, and show that level of complete lack of understanding. There are many people around here who still think that openoffice is a java-dependent product of Sun Microsystems that is determined to takeover your entire desktop and consume absurd amounts of resources in order to do the simplest of imaginable tasks.
So this time, the jury is out. The AC may well have been trolling, though in this case it is equally probable they just simply were ignorant.
It would have been great to see them do some work towards importing excel macros into openoffice. Obviously there are ample good reasons not to do it; but plenty of reasons in favor of it as well. And really, anything that encourages MSOffice -> openoffice migration should get some attention, IMHO.
Quite simply, I have no problem with the album. I see nothing partisan about science. Science is supposed to be neutral and interested only in facts.
I pose the question moreso because a certain hyperconservative hack from slashdot (who doesn't hang around here much anymore) took great offense at the album. I figure he was not alone, and I was wondering how many others might have felt the same way. Considering the wasp's nest of conservatism that slashdot has become, I would suspect that question may be rather popular here.
Some of your fans felt that the album "here comes the science" was pushing a specific agenda that was never previously a part of your music. Do you feel that the (perceived) partisan tones on that album are real or imagined, and if they are real do they reflect a change in the attitudes of TMBG as a band or the individual members thereof?
Your 486 has PCI? Gotta be one of the later models, made when pentium had become the norm then...
2PCI, 1 shared ISA/PCI, 4 ISA (2 with VLB).
7 slots to rule them all...
I can have a video card with 512mb of ram in my 486 with 8mb of ram. I can't wait to see what Doom looks like now!
I know, it is hard to fathom that anyone would not have an account, but I have intentionally avoided it myself. However since I do appear to be the only person left in the world who doesn't have one, there is bound to be something that someone who knows me has posted that relates to me.
Is it possible to request it? After all, if a user requests all the info that facebook as on them, and all they give them is the information that they posted, that is - to be kind - a very incomplete version of the data set.
The reason people are afraid of math is usually around the time they get an 8th grade math teacher, you know, after all the easy stuff is over and they get boring Mr. so and so who will explode your brain with geometry, algebra and trig that he barely understands himself. You know, the guy who actually has negative creativity and sucks it out of anyone he speaks to. The guy who is capable of putting students to sleep from across campus. Yeah, that guy. It then becomes a case of learn the formula, try to pass the test, another term over with, rinse, repeat.
Poor instruction is one component, for sure. However you failed to mention another one that is equally important in students' attitudes toward math.
Parents.
Children of math-phobes tend to almost invariably grow up to be math-phobes themselves. Children whose parents got away with failing math will be allowed to fail math as well. Their parents saw it as scary and meaningless, so they will see it the same. The greatest math teachers in the world can't teach math to someone who comes in the room believing they can't learn it.