Thanks for the tip, any pointers how I should do this? I do have a moderately large corpus: ~11.000 or 50Gb That is a lot to listen to (1 month back-to-back) but not a lot of records/me thinks.
And to the GP: no I use arst for the plugin. Gstreamer may be better, but hard to (figure out how to) get it to cooperate with KDE. I totally share Torvalds views on Gnome and shun most things prefixed with a misplaced G.
Amarok may be a nice lookin musicplayer, but it is a hell to get running on Debian Testing, and if you finaly have installed it, it constantly crashes (at least with me). Why should a simple player take 50% cpu when switching to the next song? I get the impression it is suffering from featuritis and the developers are not interested in putting out a stable and usable player. Eyecandy and flashy features are worth nothing if the thing crashes 5 times a day.
So amarok dev's: please develop on the current stable kde release and let regressiontests help you maintaining a stable base.
So this guy made some amendments to an article to find out how easy it is to 'fool' wikipedians. There must be thousands that have done that already, mostly known as vandalism. Now this whole hoopla has drawn the attention of million more cowboys to wikipedia. Some of them want to verify themselves that they too can write in wikipedia. Most will be caugth as simple vandalism (most peaple are not very smart mischieving) but som ewill fall though the cracks unnoticed. That percentage might even be bigger that the extra articles this new readership write. So readership increases, amout of articles increases, but and the signal/noise ratio decreases rapidly. Smarter people are more likely to notice this increase and will turn away from it. So in the end, Wikipedia will be read (&written) by more less intelligent people.
There have been other cameras like this one that recorded (photo or film) on regular film instead of digital. They looked sideways or downward with a prism. If you look closely on the pics at amazon, you can see part of the rocket body in the picture, so I guess this one looks down.
I would be very interested to know how these guys depend on the publishers of exotic journals. Perhaps they get paid in monies and esteem by reviewing articles for them? Slashdot itself can be seen as a peer-reviewed site, and it is doing quite well i'd say. I would have loved a site like this (but based on 'real' science) when I was doing science. But maybe the conservqatives fear that their fragile ecosystem of importance, references and reviews would all fall down when the web equalises it. Suddenly bright young studends will have as much esteem as a good-for-nothing professor, and they all fear they are that good-for-nothing.
The first step is realise your stong point and your weak points. Do the strong points include parenting? Well go right ahead. But it is more likely since you are reading/., that you would file parenting skills under weak points or unknown-uninterested. But biology teaches you that you have to procreate, for the survival of your magnificent ego^H^H^Hgenes. In fact, you would like to have 10 kids or more, if you would not have to raise them. You can, and make other people happy in the process too. Just donate sperm (to sperm banks mind you, not to innocent cute girls you see walking under your window). There are thousands of couples trying their hardest to get kids and fail because of male infertility. They'd rather have (half) your kid then none at all. One session in such a clinical place will not only give you an orgasm, but also the ego gratification that you have fullfilled your biological purpose to procreate.
(and yes, I am mostly trying to convince myself...)
Well, I do not trust you on that. Every parent says he's doing fine. Only the really shitty ones will admid they made a few mistakes. Can you imagine the humiliation if you have to admit you made a mess of your kids upbringing. 1 in 3 (or more) marriages ends in divorce, kids or no kids. That means you are at risk too. Ergo: You cannot claim objectively you are doing fine until you can legally drink a beer with them.
And the inventor solved that early on. Indeed the dye has to be attached to the soap or else the relatively heavy dye will sink to the bottom of the bubble to form a dark spot in a clear bubble. The other problem (if you'd read TFA you'd have known) is that parents do not like it much if their kid comes home when it is splattered with your dye, no matter if it washes of easily. He solved that problem with a dye that can switch between colored and uncolored.
1) Guy wants picture from vi book on notebook 2) goes to some lab where they have a machine to do it 3) copyrights free image is imported into Coreldraw 4) Laptop is etched 5) picture is on laptop
PS: what is wrong with slashdot? I have to sign in constantly... PS2:
6) ??? 7) profit!!!!
OT:Re:Obligatory Monty Python reference
on
King Kong Lived?
·
· Score: 1
yup, I made a horrible typo there. A whole word fell through the cracks of my proofreading. Anyway I am happy with the karma anyhow. Can you get more than 'excellent'? Time for some Hot Choclate. (no preview today)
Re:100,000 years humans did not walk in asia
on
King Kong Lived?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
True, wikipedia is a source that you can never trust 100% for the reasons you cite. That is why I mentioned I got the info from wikipedia. It was just the first source google came up with that answered my question. I do not know about the other sites that google offered, so this is a good as any. Better the evil you know...
Re:100,000 years humans did not walk in asia
on
King Kong Lived?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
That is debatable (but a silly debate). If you consider Neanderthals as early humans too (they decended from H erectus just like H. sapiens) then yes H.erectus is a early human too. It's all depending on where you draw the line. If you stretch it really far, you could even argue that the first proto-mammals were early humans too. Personally(as a laymen) I draw the line at H. Sapiens. Before that is humanoid, but not human.
100,000 years humans did not walk in asia
on
King Kong Lived?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
If you take a look at this map, it suggests that modern man entered asia only about 70-60,000 years ago. So this ceartue may not have lived alongside early humans. Human history isn't that old really, wikipedia pegs the start of H.Sapiens at 200,000 years ago, and most of that time has been spent in Africa.
By the same token the US [c|sh]ould be bombed too. There are enough evil companies in their mids to justify obliteration, if you use the same reasoning as you do. Maybe, just maybe, collective punishment is no justice at all. At least it will be self-eradicating: the relatives of the people that perished in your collective punishment are allowed to retaliate against proponents of that law and anybody that allowed it to come into force. Until you have become a tryrant, i suggest you shelve those little plans of yours.
So this guy had the installation hacked up so he didn't need any users permission to install the spyware. Why on earth didn't he also hack the display of the popups so they were shown to/dev/null (or whatever the windows variant is) instead of to the user. The most succesfull virusses are the ones that affect their host the least. Or if it was really only the installations, why not fake the installation?
Worms/bots/virusses usually try to patch the vulnr they entered with. If they extended this behavior to keep windows fully patched then they could even be beneficial to their victims/hosts. That would increase the chances of survival of the malware even more.
Response times, we want to know if this can keep up with some of the electronica that has very aggressive basslines.
Yes with modern music you have to be very strict, it might try to intimidate your neighbors if you do not respond quick enough.
Seriously, what are you talking about? This is not a lcd monitor. The lower the frequency, the more room for delay you get. A half cycle at 25 Hz takes a lot longer than a half cycle at 1kHz. You have to use all kinds of tricks to make sure the woofer and tweeter are in phase, as you can hardly hear that. Anything beyond that is a crook swindling you out of your money, with the vistims being called audiophiles.
Are you sure about that? If I have a circle of 1/2 wavelength diameter (1/4 wave from source to center), and the source is an antinode, I will still have a node in the center.
Wavelengt at 20Hz is ~8 metres (if my guesstimate of 4 metres for 40Hz is correct) if you make the circle larger than say 1.8 metres, you will hit a trough when you approach 25Hz. It would not suprise me if you need at least a radius of half a wavelength to get the full power in the center (and you can place many more woofers in a 8 metre circle).
Thanks for the extra insight, but it still no clear to me how this thing works. At what speed does it rotate? does the rotation produce extra noise like a normal fan? I suppose the trick is in modulating the angle of attack of the spinning fanblades. The resulting increase or decrease in lift are the tones you are trying to produce. But how do you get this change? Is the whole hub vibrating axially? (will cost relatively much input power because of the weight of the hub, but offers simple construction) or is each blade twisted induvidually? (much more involved construction but costs less amplifier power, output power comes from the motor that drives the fan).
Maybe there are even other ways to produce such an original speaker effect.
Input power (rms) is not the same as output power. a lightbulb typically consumes 40 Watt. I can make more noise with any of my acoustic instuments than with a lightbulb.
As you pointed out, if you use several sources the soundwaves can reinforce or cancel eachother. To do a sweep from 1-25 Hz would mean you have to move your sources in accourdance with the frequency. Just a few points on the curve that you can calculate beforehand would be much simpler.
These guys(Xen) have all these companies donating money to them, but have been beaten to kernel inclusion by UML. UML is basically a two man project, developed by Jeff Dike and Paolo Giarrusso (aka Blaisorblade). Xen may be multi platform and all, but thus far UML is easier to handle and does not require the host to run a patched kernel (you could use a patched kernel, but the newest development Skas0 does not need it).
sure it was with 'no data'. That 3.6 Mb is just white noise then, I suppose? FYI: it is 16 sheets of cut & paste 'data' with 16282 rows per sheet. You still want to argue that this is not a doctered set? And no, I cannot compare the two, the MS product does not run on linux. (the file took ~8 min to load on my system) My argument is stil valid: he made it look like it was an objective comparison. But only one data point (one file to load) and no explanation why or how this file was chosen is not carefull research. This is FUD/mudslinging.
Yes, he posted statistics. Are you aware what can be done with statistics? Are you aware that the document he tested with might not relate to reality? Could it be that he picked that form just to prove his bias?
Re:Testament to Open Source Software Developers
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
is it a true whack though? you use quotes to delimit the results. If you omit the results you get a lot more. (BTW the bayesian babble wordlist page has already been slashdotted. Nice)
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the tip, any pointers how I should do this? I do have a moderately large corpus: ~11.000 or 50Gb That is a lot to listen to (1 month back-to-back) but not a lot of records /me thinks.
And to the GP: no I use arst for the plugin. Gstreamer may be better, but hard to (figure out how to) get it to cooperate with KDE. I totally share Torvalds views on Gnome and shun most things prefixed with a misplaced G.
hmm, final episode, only 3 left, 2 spacesuits and 1 winner. I bet the winner will not wear a spacesuit.
Amarok may be a nice lookin musicplayer, but it is a hell to get running on Debian Testing, and if you finaly have installed it, it constantly crashes (at least with me). Why should a simple player take 50% cpu when switching to the next song? I get the impression it is suffering from featuritis and the developers are not interested in putting out a stable and usable player. Eyecandy and flashy features are worth nothing if the thing crashes 5 times a day.
So amarok dev's: please develop on the current stable kde release and let regressiontests help you maintaining a stable base.
So this guy made some amendments to an article to find out how easy it is to 'fool' wikipedians. There must be thousands that have done that already, mostly known as vandalism. Now this whole hoopla has drawn the attention of million more cowboys to wikipedia. Some of them want to verify themselves that they too can write in wikipedia. Most will be caugth as simple vandalism (most peaple are not very smart mischieving) but som ewill fall though the cracks unnoticed. That percentage might even be bigger that the extra articles this new readership write.
So readership increases, amout of articles increases, but and the signal/noise ratio decreases rapidly. Smarter people are more likely to notice this increase and will turn away from it. So in the end, Wikipedia will be read (&written) by more less intelligent people.
There have been other cameras like this one that recorded (photo or film) on regular film instead of digital. They looked sideways or downward with a prism. If you look closely on the pics at amazon, you can see part of the rocket body in the picture, so I guess this one looks down.
I would be very interested to know how these guys depend on the publishers of exotic journals. Perhaps they get paid in monies and esteem by reviewing articles for them?
Slashdot itself can be seen as a peer-reviewed site, and it is doing quite well i'd say. I would have loved a site like this (but based on 'real' science) when I was doing science.
But maybe the conservqatives fear that their fragile ecosystem of importance, references and reviews would all fall down when the web equalises it. Suddenly bright young studends will have as much esteem as a good-for-nothing professor, and they all fear they are that good-for-nothing.
The first step is realise your stong point and your weak points. Do the strong points include parenting? Well go right ahead. But it is more likely since you are reading /., that you would file parenting skills under weak points or unknown-uninterested.
But biology teaches you that you have to procreate, for the survival of your magnificent ego^H^H^Hgenes. In fact, you would like to have 10 kids or more, if you would not have to raise them.
You can, and make other people happy in the process too. Just donate sperm (to sperm banks mind you, not to innocent cute girls you see walking under your window). There are thousands of couples trying their hardest to get kids and fail because of male infertility. They'd rather have (half) your kid then none at all. One session in such a clinical place will not only give you an orgasm, but also the ego gratification that you have fullfilled your biological purpose to procreate.
(and yes, I am mostly trying to convince myself...)
Well, I do not trust you on that. Every parent says he's doing fine. Only the really shitty ones will admid they made a few mistakes. Can you imagine the humiliation if you have to admit you made a mess of your kids upbringing. 1 in 3 (or more) marriages ends in divorce, kids or no kids. That means you are at risk too.
Ergo: You cannot claim objectively you are doing fine until you can legally drink a beer with them.
And the inventor solved that early on. Indeed the dye has to be attached to the soap or else the relatively heavy dye will sink to the bottom of the bubble to form a dark spot in a clear bubble.
The other problem (if you'd read TFA you'd have known) is that parents do not like it much if their kid comes home when it is splattered with your dye, no matter if it washes of easily. He solved that problem with a dye that can switch between colored and uncolored.
1) Guy wants picture from vi book on notebook
2) goes to some lab where they have a machine to do it
3) copyrights free image is imported into Coreldraw
4) Laptop is etched
5) picture is on laptop
PS: what is wrong with slashdot? I have to sign in constantly...
PS2:
6) ???
7) profit!!!!
yup, I made a horrible typo there. A whole word fell through the cracks of my proofreading. Anyway I am happy with the karma anyhow. Can you get more than 'excellent'?
Time for some Hot Choclate. (no preview today)
True, wikipedia is a source that you can never trust 100% for the reasons you cite. That is why I mentioned I got the info from wikipedia. It was just the first source google came up with that answered my question. I do not know about the other sites that google offered, so this is a good as any. Better the evil you know...
That is debatable (but a silly debate). If you consider Neanderthals as early humans too (they decended from H erectus just like H. sapiens) then yes H.erectus is a early human too. It's all depending on where you draw the line. If you stretch it really far, you could even argue that the first proto-mammals were early humans too. Personally(as a laymen) I draw the line at H. Sapiens. Before that is humanoid, but not human.
If you take a look at this map, it suggests that modern man entered asia only about 70-60,000 years ago. So this ceartue may not have lived alongside early humans.
Human history isn't that old really, wikipedia pegs the start of H.Sapiens at 200,000 years ago, and most of that time has been spent in Africa.
By the same token the US [c|sh]ould be bombed too. There are enough evil companies in their mids to justify obliteration, if you use the same reasoning as you do.
Maybe, just maybe, collective punishment is no justice at all. At least it will be self-eradicating: the relatives of the people that perished in your collective punishment are allowed to retaliate against proponents of that law and anybody that allowed it to come into force.
Until you have become a tryrant, i suggest you shelve those little plans of yours.
So this guy had the installation hacked up so he didn't need any users permission to install the spyware. Why on earth didn't he also hack the display of the popups so they were shown to /dev/null (or whatever the windows variant is) instead of to the user. The most succesfull virusses are the ones that affect their host the least. Or if it was really only the installations, why not fake the installation?
Worms/bots/virusses usually try to patch the vulnr they entered with. If they extended this behavior to keep windows fully patched then they could even be beneficial to their victims/hosts. That would increase the chances of survival of the malware even more.
Yes with modern music you have to be very strict, it might try to intimidate your neighbors if you do not respond quick enough.
Seriously, what are you talking about? This is not a lcd monitor. The lower the frequency, the more room for delay you get. A half cycle at 25 Hz takes a lot longer than a half cycle at 1kHz.
You have to use all kinds of tricks to make sure the woofer and tweeter are in phase, as you can hardly hear that. Anything beyond that is a crook swindling you out of your money, with the vistims being called audiophiles.
Are you sure about that? If I have a circle of 1/2 wavelength diameter (1/4 wave from source to center), and the source is an antinode, I will still have a node in the center.
Wavelengt at 20Hz is ~8 metres (if my guesstimate of 4 metres for 40Hz is correct) if you make the circle larger than say 1.8 metres, you will hit a trough when you approach 25Hz. It would not suprise me if you need at least a radius of half a wavelength to get the full power in the center (and you can place many more woofers in a 8 metre circle).
Thanks for the extra insight, but it still no clear to me how this thing works. At what speed does it rotate? does the rotation produce extra noise like a normal fan?
I suppose the trick is in modulating the angle of attack of the spinning fanblades. The resulting increase or decrease in lift are the tones you are trying to produce. But how do you get this change? Is the whole hub vibrating axially? (will cost relatively much input power because of the weight of the hub, but offers simple construction) or is each blade twisted induvidually? (much more involved construction but costs less amplifier power, output power comes from the motor that drives the fan).
Maybe there are even other ways to produce such an original speaker effect.
Input power (rms) is not the same as output power. a lightbulb typically consumes 40 Watt. I can make more noise with any of my acoustic instuments than with a lightbulb.
As you pointed out, if you use several sources the soundwaves can reinforce or cancel eachother. To do a sweep from 1-25 Hz would mean you have to move your sources in accourdance with the frequency. Just a few points on the curve that you can calculate beforehand would be much simpler.
These guys(Xen) have all these companies donating money to them, but have been beaten to kernel inclusion by UML. UML is basically a two man project, developed by Jeff Dike and Paolo Giarrusso (aka Blaisorblade). Xen may be multi platform and all, but thus far UML is easier to handle and does not require the host to run a patched kernel (you could use a patched kernel, but the newest development Skas0 does not need it).
sure it was with 'no data'. That 3.6 Mb is just white noise then, I suppose? FYI: it is 16 sheets of cut & paste 'data' with 16282 rows per sheet. You still want to argue that this is not a doctered set?
And no, I cannot compare the two, the MS product does not run on linux. (the file took ~8 min to load on my system)
My argument is stil valid: he made it look like it was an objective comparison. But only one data point (one file to load) and no explanation why or how this file was chosen is not carefull research. This is FUD/mudslinging.
Yes, he posted statistics.
Are you aware what can be done with statistics? Are you aware that the document he tested with might not relate to reality? Could it be that he picked that form just to prove his bias?
is it a true whack though? you use quotes to delimit the results. If you omit the results you get a lot more.
(BTW the bayesian babble wordlist page has already been slashdotted. Nice)