A graphics card that's pipelining two frame behind won't do it.
Yes it will, because the human brain is more than capable of editing that much discrepancy out of your perception. In fact, a rather large portion of the human brain is designed to weed out those kinds of discrepencies and provide your consciousness with a consistent interpretation of reality.
Want some proof? Touch your toe with your hand, did you see the action before you felt it? Of course not, you perceived both happening at the same time. Despite the fact that there's no way the timing from all the nerve impulses and processing times lined up your brain just stitches it together. And because the best your brain can do is delay the slowest arriving input a tall man is living hundreds of ms in the past just by value of the time it takes a signal from his big toe to reach his brain. (At least when he's actively perceiving his big toe, it's possible the brain does even trickier things to reduce the latency by ignoring unimportant stimuli). Want another? Shift your eyes from one side of your monitor to the other, did everything go massively blurry? Probably not, but from a physics and biology standpoint it should have, the human eye moves much to fast to process the information when it's in motion. So the brain shuts off the input for that split second the eye is in motion, turns it back on, compares the new and previous image and stitches together a moving image that gives the consciousness an idea of what happened in between. A shocking amount of what we perceive on a minute by minute basis is fudged with by a series of filters in the brain that exist between our bodies and our consciousness.
Getting back to the point. A 2ms latency on the graphics pipeline (your 2 frames at 100 fps) is absolutely nothing that the brain won't edit out of your perception. Depending on the latency in other parts of the system, you could have a pipeline 50 frames deep before you have perceivable problems.
The US is a large, extremely diverse country. Doesn't it stand to reason that if you lump every kid in such a place into a single category and test them on something that the overall results are going to come out to be about average? Maybe it's just really, really hard for anyone to upset that bell curve by too much? Maybe improving the bell curve isn't as important as we think it is? Perhaps it's the outliers that are the most important for cultural success? These are basically the questions the article asks and, while it pretends to have the answers, I doubt many or any of them are backed up by actually facts.
Personally I actually agree with them. The goal should be to get as many people as possible up to the education level that they themselves can tell if they enjoy it and excel at at, then provide resources for those who are capable of greatness to achieve that greatness.
Evolution is just as well established as many things taught in a typical science curriculum.
More. Evolution is much more established than many things taught in a typical science curriculum. The amount of scrutiny, research, predictions, and applications that have been applied to evolution dwarfs that of any other popular science theory.
Nukes in space has been possible for 50 years. We don't do it because there are treaties against it, treaties that have remarkably been followed by all involved. It's not a a boat that anyone involved really wants to start rocking.
Even if there are cellular processes that could not have evolved into existence (which I doubt, and saying "we don't know how it happened isn't going to be enough to convince me), that wouldn't disprove evolution. It would perhaps disprove abiogenesis, which is a different though related field regarding the origins of life as opposed to evolution which discusses the diversity of life. Even if we found an ancient satellite orbiting the moon containing video of aliens landing on primordial earth, coding up some germs in a DNA synthesizer and letting them loose on the sterile rock it still wouldn't disprove evolution. Evolution is about what comes afterwards, it's about how you go from microscopic, undifferentiated single cell organisms to the staggering complexity that is life on earth.
Because you don't get mod points often and they don't want people wasting them on Spam, that's what the little flag in the bottom right is for these days. Obviously people use their mod points to kill it anyway, so it's probably a moot point, but I think that's the idea. And besides, 'offtopic' is accurate enough if you think about it.
If it's about keeping data up to date then they should be able to return that money to either the consumers as a small discount (to encourage them to use the service) or the stores (as a kickback every time a shopper buys through the shopping results). I can't say I'm happy with this decision, even if it is only a portion of the results that they are talking about, it still feels like a money grab.
It's all in how you interpret the data. You can fudge the numbers enough so that a gun bought for defending the home is more likely to be used in a suicide (by a member of the household) than against an intruder. Statistics are a wonderful, terrible thing.
particular demographic dependent on the intended outcome of the pollster
You don't need malice to explain the suspected discrepancy in this case. You've got a random sample of 1000 people, but it's not random. It's 1000 people who have landline phones. Who are home during the day. Who aren't on the no call list. Who don't have caller ID and/or are eager to answer opinion polls. That is a narrow group becoming narrower every day.
This is just one guy's graph from linked in, but it should at least give you an idea. Notice how people with similar jobs, interests, and abilities cluster together? You and your friends are effectively a sample size of one.
If there were a nothing with less something than the quantum vacuum it is statistically unlikely that there hasn't been a single instance of our nothing collapsing into the true nothing inside our Hubble volume. And if that happened we'd know all about it, because it would have spread here at the speed of light and erased off of existence.
If The Book of Genesis is metaphorical, then Jesus died for nothing because no fall of man ever occurred for Yahweh to have a reason to send us to Hell to begin with.
I'm admittedly not religious, but I don't follow your argument (well, not yours but the one you're relating). If 'the fall of man' is defined as mankind disobeying god why does the fall have to happen precisely in the way genesis describes? Is there a man alive who has followed all of God's rules (as defined in by the Bible since our discussion is already centered on Christianity)? I doubt it. We all disobey so logically we have all fallen (I'm sure an apologist could argue that even being tempted to disobey is a sign of having falling), where would the contradiction exist in that scenario?
They will want to balance ease of opening with tamper resistance and tamper evidence. The press locks are very easy to open, but make shoplifting and 'spare parts' lifting trivial to do in the store, all the more so because it isn't obvious that the package has been opened. More likely, they will move toward the perforated back panels, so at least you'll be able to see if someone opened it before you bought it.
My point was two fold (hence the 50/50 split). 1) Crap patents 2) Crap patent system. Picking off crap patents one by one is inefficient but will get the job of eliminating the crap patents done eventually. The larger problem is the patent system. It's the system that let everyone sit in a Mexican standoff for 20 years, which is what has eventually led to the situation we see today.
And BTW, please at least look at someone's comment history before accusing them of shilling. It's one thing to accuse guy with 5 comments all being pro-whatever of being a shill. It's another to accuse someone with... well crap, I don't even know how many but several hundred comments on several dozen different topics over the past decade or so.
Here's the thing. Every single one of the big phone manufacturers has a thousand patents that every other phone manufacturer has infringed on since the beginning of the industry. They all know this, but for literally decades everyone involved was smart enough to look at the situation and say "Oh hell no! I'm not starting that fight". The in strolled the new kid on the block, they bought some patents on the core technologies (enough to ensure they were inside the circle of mutually assured destruction along with the other manufacturers) but then they went and patented a few (frankly quite silly) UI patents. And so they thought to themselves, we might not be able to start the holy war on the core technologies, but we can certainly fire off just a few shots to protect our user interface. Which is a lot like the US during the cold war saying "surely the Soviets won't mind if we launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles at Kiev, after all, they're not ICBMs".
And the result has been about what you would expect. All out patent war in the cell phone industry, with constantly shifting alliances, tactics, and weapons. We've had import bans because a photo gallery app slid just past the available pictures to communicate to the user that they were at the end. We've had court cases fought over "Swipe to unlock". We've had multi-billion dollar companies bought, sold, and gutted for their patent portfolios. And, most importantly and the issue no one seems to pay attention to, we've created an environment where there is absolutely no chance, literally zero, of a new player entering the game.
So, you say to Google "build Android so that it doesn't infringe on patents". I say 50% of those patents are invalid, and it's just going to take the right court case to show that once and for all. Of the remaining 50%, everyone in the industry stomps all over them, to the point where even the biggest players can't be sure who owns what, who is defending what, and what their next project might infringe upon. It's broken. It's not really Apple's fault, even if they were the ones to set of Armageddon the system has been screwed up for too long to blame them. Any system that relies on cold war style MAD is going to break down eventually.
He does make one good point, or at least raises a good question. Why wait till now to decide the issue of copyrightability? Especially given that his decision is pretty clear cut in favor of Google. The judge knew all along that this was going to appeal and that with his background and knowledge he was uniquely qualified to sit on this case. He wanted to make sure he got the opportunity to lay out as much information as possible for the next judge up the ladder to prevent lawyer and 'expert' witness spin trolling an uninformed judge. Whoever sits the appeal for this case will have a a few dozen pages that succinctly, accurately, and unbiasedly describes the situation and hopefully will be much harder to sway with BS arguments like "I could code for 6 months and not come up with those 9 lines of code".
Arg, how do people not understand this? OS signing is a good thing! It's a feature you should want on your next piece of hardware. Being forced to disable this feature to get around MS control is not a good thing!
Yep, nothing DARPA has ever put money into has ever been licensed for commercial use. Everything they put money into is immediately used for war. Seriously? I'm could come up with a nice long list of links for products that are used commercially today that were originally funded by DARPA and a much longer list of DARPA sponsored projects that never came to fruition at all, let alone ever got used by the military.
"Factories like this" being quickly reconfigurable to manufacture a variety of products? You don't see any potential commercial uses for that? Do you really not understand the push toward manufacturing on demand?
Yeah, after all, the US only exports $1.5 trillion dollars worth of good every year. Just the second largest exporter in the world (second to China, despite having less than 1/3 the population). Yeah, the US doesn't make anything these days.
You do realize just how many laws apply to slot machines right? And how many people are involved in verifying that they're following those laws? And how often they are inspected? And how severely punished everyone involved in it would be if fraud were discovered? And that even beyond the criminal punishments they'd be liable for lawsuits from everyone who played the fraudulent machines?
Your analogy is as full of fail as it could possibly be.
If the company is hiding information there's no way for investors to do their due diligence. I think we all know Facebook stock was/is overvalued, that doesn't mean you get to hide your real earnings forecasts from potential investors in the days leading up to your IPO.
If supposedly 50% of people pirate just software [slashdot.org], that alone will result in the ISPs only having 50% of their current income. Throw music and movies into the mix, and it would not surprise me if that number was over 75%.
It's even worse than that. If there are an average of 4 regular users on a given home internet connection (which doesn't seem unreasonable), there's only a 1/16 chance that none of them are pirating something if you go by raw averages. What do you think they'll say when they realize they've sent out 3rd, 4th, and 5th warnings to 90% of their customers?
Slashdot Mirror
A graphics card that's pipelining two frame behind won't do it.
Yes it will, because the human brain is more than capable of editing that much discrepancy out of your perception. In fact, a rather large portion of the human brain is designed to weed out those kinds of discrepencies and provide your consciousness with a consistent interpretation of reality.
Want some proof? Touch your toe with your hand, did you see the action before you felt it? Of course not, you perceived both happening at the same time. Despite the fact that there's no way the timing from all the nerve impulses and processing times lined up your brain just stitches it together. And because the best your brain can do is delay the slowest arriving input a tall man is living hundreds of ms in the past just by value of the time it takes a signal from his big toe to reach his brain. (At least when he's actively perceiving his big toe, it's possible the brain does even trickier things to reduce the latency by ignoring unimportant stimuli). Want another? Shift your eyes from one side of your monitor to the other, did everything go massively blurry? Probably not, but from a physics and biology standpoint it should have, the human eye moves much to fast to process the information when it's in motion. So the brain shuts off the input for that split second the eye is in motion, turns it back on, compares the new and previous image and stitches together a moving image that gives the consciousness an idea of what happened in between. A shocking amount of what we perceive on a minute by minute basis is fudged with by a series of filters in the brain that exist between our bodies and our consciousness.
Getting back to the point. A 2ms latency on the graphics pipeline (your 2 frames at 100 fps) is absolutely nothing that the brain won't edit out of your perception. Depending on the latency in other parts of the system, you could have a pipeline 50 frames deep before you have perceivable problems.
The US is a large, extremely diverse country. Doesn't it stand to reason that if you lump every kid in such a place into a single category and test them on something that the overall results are going to come out to be about average? Maybe it's just really, really hard for anyone to upset that bell curve by too much? Maybe improving the bell curve isn't as important as we think it is? Perhaps it's the outliers that are the most important for cultural success? These are basically the questions the article asks and, while it pretends to have the answers, I doubt many or any of them are backed up by actually facts.
Personally I actually agree with them. The goal should be to get as many people as possible up to the education level that they themselves can tell if they enjoy it and excel at at, then provide resources for those who are capable of greatness to achieve that greatness.
Evolution is just as well established as many things taught in a typical science curriculum.
More. Evolution is much more established than many things taught in a typical science curriculum. The amount of scrutiny, research, predictions, and applications that have been applied to evolution dwarfs that of any other popular science theory.
Nukes in space has been possible for 50 years. We don't do it because there are treaties against it, treaties that have remarkably been followed by all involved. It's not a a boat that anyone involved really wants to start rocking.
Even if there are cellular processes that could not have evolved into existence (which I doubt, and saying "we don't know how it happened isn't going to be enough to convince me), that wouldn't disprove evolution. It would perhaps disprove abiogenesis, which is a different though related field regarding the origins of life as opposed to evolution which discusses the diversity of life. Even if we found an ancient satellite orbiting the moon containing video of aliens landing on primordial earth, coding up some germs in a DNA synthesizer and letting them loose on the sterile rock it still wouldn't disprove evolution. Evolution is about what comes afterwards, it's about how you go from microscopic, undifferentiated single cell organisms to the staggering complexity that is life on earth.
Because you don't get mod points often and they don't want people wasting them on Spam, that's what the little flag in the bottom right is for these days. Obviously people use their mod points to kill it anyway, so it's probably a moot point, but I think that's the idea. And besides, 'offtopic' is accurate enough if you think about it.
If it's about keeping data up to date then they should be able to return that money to either the consumers as a small discount (to encourage them to use the service) or the stores (as a kickback every time a shopper buys through the shopping results). I can't say I'm happy with this decision, even if it is only a portion of the results that they are talking about, it still feels like a money grab.
It's all in how you interpret the data. You can fudge the numbers enough so that a gun bought for defending the home is more likely to be used in a suicide (by a member of the household) than against an intruder. Statistics are a wonderful, terrible thing.
particular demographic dependent on the intended outcome of the pollster
You don't need malice to explain the suspected discrepancy in this case. You've got a random sample of 1000 people, but it's not random. It's 1000 people who have landline phones. Who are home during the day. Who aren't on the no call list. Who don't have caller ID and/or are eager to answer opinion polls. That is a narrow group becoming narrower every day.
This is just one guy's graph from linked in, but it should at least give you an idea. Notice how people with similar jobs, interests, and abilities cluster together? You and your friends are effectively a sample size of one.
If there were a nothing with less something than the quantum vacuum it is statistically unlikely that there hasn't been a single instance of our nothing collapsing into the true nothing inside our Hubble volume. And if that happened we'd know all about it, because it would have spread here at the speed of light and erased off of existence.
If The Book of Genesis is metaphorical, then Jesus died for nothing because no fall of man ever occurred for Yahweh to have a reason to send us to Hell to begin with.
I'm admittedly not religious, but I don't follow your argument (well, not yours but the one you're relating). If 'the fall of man' is defined as mankind disobeying god why does the fall have to happen precisely in the way genesis describes? Is there a man alive who has followed all of God's rules (as defined in by the Bible since our discussion is already centered on Christianity)? I doubt it. We all disobey so logically we have all fallen (I'm sure an apologist could argue that even being tempted to disobey is a sign of having falling), where would the contradiction exist in that scenario?
They will want to balance ease of opening with tamper resistance and tamper evidence. The press locks are very easy to open, but make shoplifting and 'spare parts' lifting trivial to do in the store, all the more so because it isn't obvious that the package has been opened. More likely, they will move toward the perforated back panels, so at least you'll be able to see if someone opened it before you bought it.
My point was two fold (hence the 50/50 split). 1) Crap patents 2) Crap patent system. Picking off crap patents one by one is inefficient but will get the job of eliminating the crap patents done eventually. The larger problem is the patent system. It's the system that let everyone sit in a Mexican standoff for 20 years, which is what has eventually led to the situation we see today.
And BTW, please at least look at someone's comment history before accusing them of shilling. It's one thing to accuse guy with 5 comments all being pro-whatever of being a shill. It's another to accuse someone with... well crap, I don't even know how many but several hundred comments on several dozen different topics over the past decade or so.
Yes, the difference is the forest fire eventually goes out. The smog from Atlanta is being produced 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
Here's the thing. Every single one of the big phone manufacturers has a thousand patents that every other phone manufacturer has infringed on since the beginning of the industry. They all know this, but for literally decades everyone involved was smart enough to look at the situation and say "Oh hell no! I'm not starting that fight". The in strolled the new kid on the block, they bought some patents on the core technologies (enough to ensure they were inside the circle of mutually assured destruction along with the other manufacturers) but then they went and patented a few (frankly quite silly) UI patents. And so they thought to themselves, we might not be able to start the holy war on the core technologies, but we can certainly fire off just a few shots to protect our user interface. Which is a lot like the US during the cold war saying "surely the Soviets won't mind if we launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles at Kiev, after all, they're not ICBMs".
And the result has been about what you would expect. All out patent war in the cell phone industry, with constantly shifting alliances, tactics, and weapons. We've had import bans because a photo gallery app slid just past the available pictures to communicate to the user that they were at the end. We've had court cases fought over "Swipe to unlock". We've had multi-billion dollar companies bought, sold, and gutted for their patent portfolios. And, most importantly and the issue no one seems to pay attention to, we've created an environment where there is absolutely no chance, literally zero, of a new player entering the game.
So, you say to Google "build Android so that it doesn't infringe on patents". I say 50% of those patents are invalid, and it's just going to take the right court case to show that once and for all. Of the remaining 50%, everyone in the industry stomps all over them, to the point where even the biggest players can't be sure who owns what, who is defending what, and what their next project might infringe upon. It's broken. It's not really Apple's fault, even if they were the ones to set of Armageddon the system has been screwed up for too long to blame them. Any system that relies on cold war style MAD is going to break down eventually.
He does make one good point, or at least raises a good question. Why wait till now to decide the issue of copyrightability? Especially given that his decision is pretty clear cut in favor of Google. The judge knew all along that this was going to appeal and that with his background and knowledge he was uniquely qualified to sit on this case. He wanted to make sure he got the opportunity to lay out as much information as possible for the next judge up the ladder to prevent lawyer and 'expert' witness spin trolling an uninformed judge. Whoever sits the appeal for this case will have a a few dozen pages that succinctly, accurately, and unbiasedly describes the situation and hopefully will be much harder to sway with BS arguments like "I could code for 6 months and not come up with those 9 lines of code".
Arg, how do people not understand this? OS signing is a good thing! It's a feature you should want on your next piece of hardware. Being forced to disable this feature to get around MS control is not a good thing!
Yep, nothing DARPA has ever put money into has ever been licensed for commercial use. Everything they put money into is immediately used for war. Seriously? I'm could come up with a nice long list of links for products that are used commercially today that were originally funded by DARPA and a much longer list of DARPA sponsored projects that never came to fruition at all, let alone ever got used by the military.
"Factories like this" being quickly reconfigurable to manufacture a variety of products? You don't see any potential commercial uses for that? Do you really not understand the push toward manufacturing on demand?
Yeah, after all, the US only exports $1.5 trillion dollars worth of good every year. Just the second largest exporter in the world (second to China, despite having less than 1/3 the population). Yeah, the US doesn't make anything these days.
You do realize just how many laws apply to slot machines right? And how many people are involved in verifying that they're following those laws? And how often they are inspected? And how severely punished everyone involved in it would be if fraud were discovered? And that even beyond the criminal punishments they'd be liable for lawsuits from everyone who played the fraudulent machines?
Your analogy is as full of fail as it could possibly be.
If the company is hiding information there's no way for investors to do their due diligence. I think we all know Facebook stock was/is overvalued, that doesn't mean you get to hide your real earnings forecasts from potential investors in the days leading up to your IPO.
If supposedly 50% of people pirate just software [slashdot.org], that alone will result in the ISPs only having 50% of their current income.
Throw music and movies into the mix, and it would not surprise me if that number was over 75%.
It's even worse than that. If there are an average of 4 regular users on a given home internet connection (which doesn't seem unreasonable), there's only a 1/16 chance that none of them are pirating something if you go by raw averages. What do you think they'll say when they realize they've sent out 3rd, 4th, and 5th warnings to 90% of their customers?
How big an area does Kinect cover again? Nice on the precision, but the effective area is about my seated computing space.
Which is probably the area they're trying to shoot for.