It looks fine in Lynx. Wants me to download IE9, though. Seems like just a trick to get me to download another stupid piece of software I don't need. Moving on.
Well, I don't think the userspace file system layer is the main slowdown on my file server box (using old hardware + a slower ethernet card; for a background backup system, it works), so I'm not speaking from experience here. I've heard the general idea is a 30-60 % slowdown is standard, depending on the operation.
Which is actually a true story; my dad had a contract with NASA or JPL (I forget which), and some employees he was working with got sick of their boss coming in and fiddling with the lab equipment, so they set up such a button. "... After pressing it, he just stood there and stared at it quietly."
Not to mention that for audio equipment sales, it's a common trick to have the volume adjusted up just slightly for demonstrating more expensive equipment; this is known to sound subconsciously better even if there's no other difference.
Yes, but ranking best to worst is a bit different from correctly distinguishing all the subtle tastes and smells in a bottle of wine. If you ask me to rank my favorite ice creams week by week, it'd be pretty random too, depending on the weather, the meal I recently had, whether I'd been exercising, etc. But given a bowl of ice cream, I could tell you the flavor.
... and the only things left to chance are your strategies.
and whether you had too much coffee that morning, failed to see that move 10 steps ahead, etc. In high level chess, it seems that these kind of things have enormous effects on the outcome of the game and are not things that can be easily modeled except as random effects. Thus there is definitely a random element in the outcome of the game; Kasparov vs. Deep Blue was a mix of wins and losses; definitely not a deterministic outcome.
As a Ph.D. student in statistics with a masters in CS (mainly machine learning and AI), here's my few words of advice:
First, some masters programs are aimed at research masters, and encourage you to incorporate a strong research component to your degree, and some are more "predictable" and classroom based with smaller, more defined projects. The master's program I did at UBC - - University of British Columbia -- was heavy on the research; we took 1 year of classes and then 1 year of research. They also have a strong machine learning and AI program, which I thought was very neat. If you pursue that direction, contact me directly and I'll give you the inside scoop. Other programs may have similar research tracks, but many don't.
Second, it would really be the particular professors you end up working with that will shape your experience and how much you develop your software skills. You can learn about what a particular research group or working group is like from the websites of the professors involved and what sorts of paper and software they've published recently. I would highly encourage you to contact such professors before you apply to the university; the university admissions process is more about keeping bad people out than making sure the absolute best get in, so there's a lot of randomness in the admissions. Having a professor say "I'd like to work with this person, he'd be a big help to my research, can you let him in" usually means you get in unless the department doesn't think you could succeed. And, frankly, any professor would love to have a great coder on their team; many people without job experience can be bad coders.
Finally, if you are math inclined, and want something that could vastly help you in the job market, I'd consider doing a statistics degree. Statistics is pretty ubiquitous -- machine learning, AI, etc. are really just sexy names for statistics (yes, there's some more algorithms thrown in the mix, but the underlying theory is all statistics), and it also comes up in pretty much every other field as well. If you go to a strong research university, it's likely that you'll have opportunity to do research in a ton of different fields; I'm now at the university of washington in the stats department, and half the professors are joint with another department like economics, sociology, biology (there's a strong biostats department too), etc. I joke that it's the degree program for indecisive people, since it doesn't really limit what field you end up studying in. (Of course, not all stats programs are like this, but UW is).
If you read the mentioned JMLR journal article (link to free version: here), it presents this problem as one of prioritizing maintenance. It's some neat AI, and seems quite useful.
I think the problem is not in firefox but in the addons, and many addons seem to have very poor memory handling. Almost all of my memory and performance problems went away when I uninstalled FasterFox. I now only have a essential addons -- noscript, flashblock, adblock, and a couple tiny ones. But I think that's why they're going about it the way they are.
It's often possible to determine how a pseudorandom numbers were generated by finding characteristic statistical biases. See http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.19.7206. The authors found significant biases under some tests for true randomness in a number of standard encryption algorithms, meaning that one could run these tests and likely distinguish between an AES encrypted bitstream and one generated some other way.
I am sure BP is doing everything it can to stop the oil gushing out, despite what all the (sometimes idiotic, very amusing) armchair engineers are saying is the "obvious" thing to do.
However, it seems the real battle that will have the greatest impact on the future of this is over who controls the media now, and that's where BP needs to get its hands tied.
Neutrinos only interact through the weak forces, which require them to be extremely close to other particles with which they interact. Such interactions also require the neutrino to have a lot of energy, since the force-carrying particles are quite massive. This is why all these experiments use neutrinos generated by very energetic reactions (accelerators, the sun, cosmic rays, etc.).
When I worked with BooNE, an experiment researching neutrino osculations, our detector was a 40 ft tank lined filled with clear, food-grade mineral oil and lined with photo tubes capable of detecting a few photons. The neutrinos were generated by bursts of protons crashing into a special block (I don't remember the material), and the byproducts at the given energy levels would be one type of neutrino. The interactions from different types of neutrinos would have different decays, which produced different signature rings of photons on the walls of the detector. In generating 10^9 + neutrinos, we only expected a handful of interactions.
Gravity is also on the table, but it's impossible to measure neutrinos based on that.
Slashdot Mirror
It looks fine in Lynx. Wants me to download IE9, though. Seems like just a trick to get me to download another stupid piece of software I don't need. Moving on.
Ah, very interesting. Thanks for the link.
What about http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.19.7206? Seems that fits your bill; in essence, there are certain statistical biases in many of the encryption schemes that can be calculated quite quickly.
As in http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.19.7206?
Well, I don't think the userspace file system layer is the main slowdown on my file server box (using old hardware + a slower ethernet card; for a background backup system, it works), so I'm not speaking from experience here. I've heard the general idea is a 30-60 % slowdown is standard, depending on the operation.
The latest stable version of zfs-fuse, 0.6.9, includes pool version 23 which has dedup support. Haven't tried it out yet, though.
http://zfs-fuse.net/releases/0.6.9
Or "Launch Sequence Initiated."
Which is actually a true story; my dad had a contract with NASA or JPL (I forget which), and some employees he was working with got sick of their boss coming in and fiddling with the lab equipment, so they set up such a button. "... After pressing it, he just stood there and stared at it quietly."
Not to mention that for audio equipment sales, it's a common trick to have the volume adjusted up just slightly for demonstrating more expensive equipment; this is known to sound subconsciously better even if there's no other difference.
Yes, but ranking best to worst is a bit different from correctly distinguishing all the subtle tastes and smells in a bottle of wine. If you ask me to rank my favorite ice creams week by week, it'd be pretty random too, depending on the weather, the meal I recently had, whether I'd been exercising, etc. But given a bowl of ice cream, I could tell you the flavor.
Why the balloons in the article are all glowing different colors?
... like a rampaging herd of tiny yipping dogs with 10khz barks.
and whether you had too much coffee that morning, failed to see that move 10 steps ahead, etc. In high level chess, it seems that these kind of things have enormous effects on the outcome of the game and are not things that can be easily modeled except as random effects. Thus there is definitely a random element in the outcome of the game; Kasparov vs. Deep Blue was a mix of wins and losses; definitely not a deterministic outcome.
... his pin number is 1 2 3 4 5.
As a Ph.D. student in statistics with a masters in CS (mainly machine learning and AI), here's my few words of advice:
First, some masters programs are aimed at research masters, and encourage you to incorporate a strong research component to your degree, and some are more "predictable" and classroom based with smaller, more defined projects. The master's program I did at UBC - - University of British Columbia -- was heavy on the research; we took 1 year of classes and then 1 year of research. They also have a strong machine learning and AI program, which I thought was very neat. If you pursue that direction, contact me directly and I'll give you the inside scoop. Other programs may have similar research tracks, but many don't.
Second, it would really be the particular professors you end up working with that will shape your experience and how much you develop your software skills. You can learn about what a particular research group or working group is like from the websites of the professors involved and what sorts of paper and software they've published recently. I would highly encourage you to contact such professors before you apply to the university; the university admissions process is more about keeping bad people out than making sure the absolute best get in, so there's a lot of randomness in the admissions. Having a professor say "I'd like to work with this person, he'd be a big help to my research, can you let him in" usually means you get in unless the department doesn't think you could succeed. And, frankly, any professor would love to have a great coder on their team; many people without job experience can be bad coders.
Finally, if you are math inclined, and want something that could vastly help you in the job market, I'd consider doing a statistics degree. Statistics is pretty ubiquitous -- machine learning, AI, etc. are really just sexy names for statistics (yes, there's some more algorithms thrown in the mix, but the underlying theory is all statistics), and it also comes up in pretty much every other field as well. If you go to a strong research university, it's likely that you'll have opportunity to do research in a ton of different fields; I'm now at the university of washington in the stats department, and half the professors are joint with another department like economics, sociology, biology (there's a strong biostats department too), etc. I joke that it's the degree program for indecisive people, since it doesn't really limit what field you end up studying in. (Of course, not all stats programs are like this, but UW is).
I think...
But maybe I'm wrong.
BP had better be doing a good job with the cleanup, cause now we have a way to be REALLY sure it gets cleaned up.
With probability 1/2, yes.
If you read the mentioned JMLR journal article (link to free version: here), it presents this problem as one of prioritizing maintenance. It's some neat AI, and seems quite useful.
I think the problem is not in firefox but in the addons, and many addons seem to have very poor memory handling. Almost all of my memory and performance problems went away when I uninstalled FasterFox. I now only have a essential addons -- noscript, flashblock, adblock, and a couple tiny ones. But I think that's why they're going about it the way they are.
That's like 960 trillion wasted milliseconds!!!!!
Seriously though, why did they design the milestones for announcements like this in minutes? We never heard about the 250 million hour mark...
It's often possible to determine how a pseudorandom numbers were generated by finding characteristic statistical biases. See http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.19.7206. The authors found significant biases under some tests for true randomness in a number of standard encryption algorithms, meaning that one could run these tests and likely distinguish between an AES encrypted bitstream and one generated some other way.
How unselfish of them, thinking of all those obscure authors they've left behind!
we at slashdot would appreciate it if you showed those big banks how to work properly with stats.
See, for example: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/green/detail?entry_id=64864 or http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/06/02/2010-06-02_the_hidden_death_in_the_gulf.html
I am sure BP is doing everything it can to stop the oil gushing out, despite what all the (sometimes idiotic, very amusing) armchair engineers are saying is the "obvious" thing to do.
However, it seems the real battle that will have the greatest impact on the future of this is over who controls the media now, and that's where BP needs to get its hands tied.
Neutrinos only interact through the weak forces, which require them to be extremely close to other particles with which they interact. Such interactions also require the neutrino to have a lot of energy, since the force-carrying particles are quite massive. This is why all these experiments use neutrinos generated by very energetic reactions (accelerators, the sun, cosmic rays, etc.).
When I worked with BooNE, an experiment researching neutrino osculations, our detector was a 40 ft tank lined filled with clear, food-grade mineral oil and lined with photo tubes capable of detecting a few photons. The neutrinos were generated by bursts of protons crashing into a special block (I don't remember the material), and the byproducts at the given energy levels would be one type of neutrino. The interactions from different types of neutrinos would have different decays, which produced different signature rings of photons on the walls of the detector. In generating 10^9 + neutrinos, we only expected a handful of interactions.
Gravity is also on the table, but it's impossible to measure neutrinos based on that.