As powerful as phones are getting, I should be able to run something like DSL on a phone soon. It would only require the phone to have 48M memory free for the OS.
And then I could get rid of my home machine and replace it with this - oh, and one of these.
I would finally buy a cell phone if I could have such a device... I'll wait to see if any "open" cell phone will give me that.
Well the fact is, the accountants aren't liable for any of SCO's sins. However, if they know that the company hasn't got the cash - or the cash flow to pay them, then I can understand why they'd quit.
Being the accounts, I would expect them to be in a pretty good position to know the financial reality of the company.
Here in the U.S., we pay a 2 percent royalty on all medium capable of storing and playing back music.And we've been paying it since 1992, when the "Digital Audio Recording Technology Act" was passed.
However, our Congress hasn't set up a legal link between the paying of that tax and our legal rights to use the devices in any ways that exceed thing on which we don't pay a tax.
It seems that in Canada you have that right attached to a tax. Hm - being taxed for something and gaining a benefit. How novel!
As a number of people have pointed out, the first thing to do is to place the computer in a public place.
Then, make certain there's only an ability to use it when there are adults around - in this case the parent.
Almost all social issues that parents don't want kids involved in are practiced solely away from the parent's eyes. This is one of the reasons that I'm adamant to make my home as enjoyable for my kids as possible without going across any of my own boundaries - if their friends only want to be here, then it makes my job orders of magnitude easier to know what my kids are getting themselves into.
Since we homeschool our kids, their use of the computer isn't always monitored. But then, they don't yet know how to clear their browser history. As for when they do, I have root and they don't. Also, our Kyocera router which gives them wireless access keeps logs.
If, some day, they start rebooting the machine to try to mod it, then I'll mod the child to the point that they understand that hacking machines at home (in the 'break in' sense) is not done.
Can Microsoft really be arrogant enough to put such software into their OS? Is this just a shot off the bow, softening up the user so that when this is put into production they'll have less ability to complain about it?
I'm amazed that anyone would think that e-mail and games are worth have an ad forced into their face. But then, I'd rather be solving problems than trough-feeding.
factors become more and more important as EVE Online grows and the market becomes more efficient.
That's really what the game stands on, the whole thing is tied together by the market system. We have various disconnected systems like mining, manufacturing, corporations, and combat, but they all tie in at the bottom with the market system. We initially spent a lot of time when the game was first made, making sure that we had an abstract, efficient, accurate market system. We made many difficult decisions where we sacrificed 'correctness' for simplicity or ease of use. It is a fairly complex thing, but it has allowed us to evolve the game quite rapidly up to this point. That said, we have been seeing more and more of a need to get professional insight into what is happening on the macro level. We've seen immediately how responsive the player base is to it. They've been looking for these kinds of insights for some time now. So his simulation is based on the presumption that everything is "market-based" and "tied together by markets". Since he can learn from his model only insofar as it is accurate, and since the Real World has other factors..... why should we care about this?
Say we get a whole generation of SimuloEconomists into decision-making positions. And then we have any of:
Natural distaster
Social Upheaval
Technological Breakthrough
War
... then doesn't this approach get completely blind-sided? What kind of useful model would it be, then?
Even if I have two groups of people and only tweak a single variable on each group, it may not matter. After all, these are two different groups of people - their behavior may change without any correlation to the tweaked variable!
Even if it's the same group of people on two servers, there's no guarantee that they'll behave the same in both tests, especially as they've gone through one test....
There are three sorts of lies. Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.
America did learn a lot from WWI/WWII, they already make the Gestapo and the SS look like bloody amateurs. Is America a 'pro' because we haven't generally shot people in the head out in the streets, or because the people are becoming less and less likely when the group being rounded up isn't their special interest group?
begin to replace flash memory in three to five years
Five years! It's always Five Years!
By 2012 I expect to have, this super memory technology, solar cells with efficiency above 70% for pennies per watt, flying cars, paper thin televisions the size of my wall, fuel cell powered hybrid cars, batteries replaced by power cells that store more power, cost less, are infinitely rechargeable, and charge/discharge like capacitors -- plus several other things from the last few months of Slashdot.
Also the Mayan calendar will have expired, and the entire West Coast in to the Sierra Nevada mountains will be flooded, so I don't know how useful this all will be to me.
* In which case, if you know when it's over you, and when it's not, then you have a rough idea of when you're in the crosshairs. That can be handy. Yep - especially if I want to moon the satellite.
There are standard tests for the uniformity of a distribution, which any CS major encounters at some point in their education. I took courses in the topic in the late 80's, so I apologize for forgetting the names of the tests.
Keep in mind that each random number generator that is purely a software function is actually a pseudo-random sequence with S values. The (S+1)th value is in fact the same as the 1st value, and you've started iterating over the sequence again. That's why we refer to it as a cycle of S values.
One such test is to iterate through with W successive values, tracking how many values in the window are uniform. Then if we slide this window down the sequence, we can see if there are regions of uniformity and non-uniformity. For a window size of W, we divide the range of the RNG info W regions and attempt to show whether or not the generated W values fall more-or-less one value per sub-range.
For instance, if we have a 32-bit RNG function (2^32 values) and we have a window of size 4k(W=2^12), we've divided our overall range into regions that are 2^20 values wide each. We can use both contiguous ranges and equidistant ranges if we have two sets of "result bins", where the first (contiguous) is tracked by the 'div W' value from the rng, and the second (equidistant) is tracked with the 'mod W' value from the rng. So, for example:
T value = some_rng();
C[ value / W ]++;
E[ value % W ]++;
will generate some pseudo-random value, and will then track the value using both contiguous ranges and equidistant ranges. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses, and for best results both should be used.
After filling up the window, we should expect each 'bin' to have a value of 1. If we put 2W values into the bins, we should expect each 'bin' to have a value of 2. The standard deviation indicates how uniform our RNG is. The best ones are quite close to 1. (As it turns out, the digits of Pi are known to be Very Good for a repeatable uniform distribution, but difficult to store in fast-to-generate form.)
As the window is slid across the range of the RNG, the distribution should remain relatively uniform.
I've heard this "we lost in Vietnam" myth so much that it ought to be the subject of TFA.
Ask anyone who was there at the start - American troops were having such a large impact that there was no way we could have been perceived as "losing" except to those who would deliberately misrepresenting the story. Yes - that means "lying".
However, when the politicians started indicating what the targets would be for both ground troops and for air strikes... then things started going to eternally hot places in a fruit-carrying-device.
I used to work for some men who were there "before we were there", at the start, during the war, and through the withdraw. For the past 20 years I've been meeting people who were there at various stages of the combat, and you can tell within 5 minutes which stage it was when the veteran was sent over. The later in the conflict, the more angst about "the war". The earlier in the conflict, the more angst about "how the politicians ****ed up the war".
Those guys who were there early - they're the ones who tend to be proud at serving well, as they got to see that their work was producing results.
1) RIAA offends the courts by trying to reverse Congress and fails, and loses some steam and (more) public credibility (with those who think they have any).
2) RIAA bribes the right people and that law gets reversed, which then costs our country its music-playing radio stations and the music industry loses the majority of its sales.
Slashdot Mirror
As powerful as phones are getting, I should be able to run something like DSL on a phone soon. It would only require the phone to have 48M memory free for the OS.
And then I could get rid of my home machine and replace it with this - oh, and one of these.
I would finally buy a cell phone if I could have such a device... I'll wait to see if any "open" cell phone will give me that.
Well the fact is, the accountants aren't liable for any of SCO's sins. However, if they know that the company hasn't got the cash - or the cash flow to pay them, then I can understand why they'd quit.
Being the accounts, I would expect them to be in a pretty good position to know the financial reality of the company.
Alright, I'll be the first to say it: I can remove any Windows boot sector virus by just installing Linux on it.
It did seem obligatory....
As it happens, I can divide by zero, but only when I try to figure out the inverse of the percentage of well-spent money from my tax dollars.
Or perhaps, the ratio of posts to informational-posts.
After all, Godwin needs revision - to paraphrase "A Beautiful Mind".
Here in the U.S., we pay a 2 percent royalty on all medium capable of storing and playing back music.And we've been paying it since 1992, when the "Digital Audio Recording Technology Act" was passed.
However, our Congress hasn't set up a legal link between the paying of that tax and our legal rights to use the devices in any ways that exceed thing on which we don't pay a tax.
It seems that in Canada you have that right attached to a tax. Hm - being taxed for something and gaining a benefit. How novel!
Then, make certain there's only an ability to use it when there are adults around - in this case the parent.
Almost all social issues that parents don't want kids involved in are practiced solely away from the parent's eyes. This is one of the reasons that I'm adamant to make my home as enjoyable for my kids as possible without going across any of my own boundaries - if their friends only want to be here, then it makes my job orders of magnitude easier to know what my kids are getting themselves into.
Since we homeschool our kids, their use of the computer isn't always monitored. But then, they don't yet know how to clear their browser history. As for when they do, I have root and they don't. Also, our Kyocera router which gives them wireless access keeps logs.
If, some day, they start rebooting the machine to try to mod it, then I'll mod the child to the point that they understand that hacking machines at home (in the 'break in' sense) is not done.
I'm amazed that anyone would think that e-mail and games are worth have an ad forced into their face. But then, I'd rather be solving problems than trough-feeding.
Say we get a whole generation of SimuloEconomists into decision-making positions. And then we have any of:
Even if I have two groups of people and only tweak a single variable on each group, it may not matter. After all, these are two different groups of people - their behavior may change without any correlation to the tweaked variable!
Even if it's the same group of people on two servers, there's no guarantee that they'll behave the same in both tests, especially as they've gone through one test....
There are three sorts of lies. Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.
Keep in mind that each random number generator that is purely a software function is actually a pseudo-random sequence with S values. The (S+1)th value is in fact the same as the 1st value, and you've started iterating over the sequence again. That's why we refer to it as a cycle of S values.
One such test is to iterate through with W successive values, tracking how many values in the window are uniform. Then if we slide this window down the sequence, we can see if there are regions of uniformity and non-uniformity. For a window size of W, we divide the range of the RNG info W regions and attempt to show whether or not the generated W values fall more-or-less one value per sub-range.
For instance, if we have a 32-bit RNG function (2^32 values) and we have a window of size 4k(W=2^12), we've divided our overall range into regions that are 2^20 values wide each. We can use both contiguous ranges and equidistant ranges if we have two sets of "result bins", where the first (contiguous) is tracked by the 'div W' value from the rng, and the second (equidistant) is tracked with the 'mod W' value from the rng. So, for example:
T value = some_rng();C[ value / W ]++;
E[ value % W ]++;
will generate some pseudo-random value, and will then track the value using both contiguous ranges and equidistant ranges. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses, and for best results both should be used.
After filling up the window, we should expect each 'bin' to have a value of 1. If we put 2W values into the bins, we should expect each 'bin' to have a value of 2. The standard deviation indicates how uniform our RNG is. The best ones are quite close to 1. (As it turns out, the digits of Pi are known to be Very Good for a repeatable uniform distribution, but difficult to store in fast-to-generate form.)
As the window is slid across the range of the RNG, the distribution should remain relatively uniform.
Oh - and you can check out the Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generator
I've heard this "we lost in Vietnam" myth so much that it ought to be the subject of TFA.
Ask anyone who was there at the start - American troops were having such a large impact that there was no way we could have been perceived as "losing" except to those who would deliberately misrepresenting the story. Yes - that means "lying".
However, when the politicians started indicating what the targets would be for both ground troops and for air strikes... then things started going to eternally hot places in a fruit-carrying-device.
I used to work for some men who were there "before we were there", at the start, during the war, and through the withdraw. For the past 20 years I've been meeting people who were there at various stages of the combat, and you can tell within 5 minutes which stage it was when the veteran was sent over. The later in the conflict, the more angst about "the war". The earlier in the conflict, the more angst about "how the politicians ****ed up the war".
Those guys who were there early - they're the ones who tend to be proud at serving well, as they got to see that their work was producing results.
"Ran away" indeed.
Ah - 'by hand' derivation. *Now* I can see that this post should be on slashdot.
Absolutely! There world is flat! Just because those other frauds won that particular battle is no reason to believe their tainted histories!
One of 2 things will probably happen:
1) RIAA offends the courts by trying to reverse Congress and fails, and loses some steam and (more) public credibility (with those who think they have any).
2) RIAA bribes the right people and that law gets reversed, which then costs our country its music-playing radio stations and the music industry loses the majority of its sales.
I'm failing to see a down side....