How about a legal distribution system using bittorrent where you get discounts of up to some percentage point if your share ratio is high enough. Yeah, there'd probably be ways to game the system, but if someone is willing to do that then they are probably willing to just download it illegally in the first place. The idea is to put forth a model that is as convenient as illegal downloads for those of us who would prefer to pay the content owners, while still reducing distribution costs to near 0.
Who else was all ready to flame about 4 being used to mean "for"?
Fixed. And I'm legitimately trying to be helpful not just being a pain in the ass, it took me like 30 seconds to figure out what you were trying to say here.
Who picked that map app for the demo? They seriously deserve to be fired, it makes their whole product look like an underpowered piece of garbage. My phone performs better than that...
I don't know, the hinge on the standard convertible tablets is definitely heftier, but it also has the whole screen rotating around a single point, where this is connected at both sides. To me, the added stability of having two hard points instead of one might overwhelm the advantage of having a larger hinge. First and foremost, the hinge in Dell's new one is much simpler, and only needs to spin 180 degrees in one direction. Second, since it's attached at both sides it shouldn't have torque in directions that the hinges aren't designed for. Basically, I'd put more faith in a couple of rotary hinges than I will in a ball in socket type hinge.
I don't follow how near infinite storage affects the ability of researchers to re-perform an experiment to gather data a second time.
What if the model of the data is as complex as the data?
Then it is, by definition, not a model. A model is a system that describes another system more complex than itself, a model that is as complex as the system it is trying to describe is just different way of looking at the system. It can still be useful, but it doesn't simplify the problem the same way a real model does.
Are all results obtained with Small Data simply artefacts of sparse counts?
Science has had a way to handle that question for centuries, it's called statistics: confidence intervals, standard deviations, etc. Any experimental result could be the result of a freak occurrence, that is why there are official and unofficial confidence interval cutoffs for publishing your results. Even if you had a sample size of one trillion, your confidence in the results could still be quite low.
It should be pretty easy to make a spectrum and say this is more distracting than that, is more distracting than that. At least then you could say that everything on one side of the line is legal and everything on the other side is distracted driving / driving under the influence. If kids are really that distracting then yeah, you'd have to make everything less distracting legal (you're not going to get away with telling parents they can't drive with their kids) but at least things would be consistent.
BTW, talking with a passenger has been shown in studies to be much less distracting than talking on a phone because your passenger will immediately shut up if conditions change and even point out things that the driver might have otherwise missed. Interestingly, the most distracting thing they found was having a passenger talk to someone else on the phone because your brain consciously or unconsciously tries to build up a picture of what the person on the other end is saying.
That's great, so whoever is in charge at the moment gets to decide which results get published. Why, they should fund a study to see which political party's policy will be best for the economy. That way everyone in the country will know for sure which party they should vote for... as long as it happens to be the one in charge, otherwise no one will ever see the results.
How are you supposed to convince others that the people in charge are wrong when the people in charge decide what information is available? You need access to information that shows them to be wrong, something that this law appears on the face to be designed to prevent. We've always been at war with Eastasia, and here's a historian that will corroborate that statement if you don't believe me.
What I read it as is that you will never hear anything from a government scientist that doesn't support the government agenda. It means that government scientists cannot realistically be treated as unbiased sources, the same way you wouldn't trust a tobacco funded study on the effects of cigarets. Would you really trust a government funded scientist's on the possible ecological damage caused by harvesting the oil sands if the current government's agenda had that as item number one? Most people would question that relationship anyway, but this new requirement makes it all but official; if you take government grant money, you will only publish results that agree with the government's stances.
Yeah, I noticed my homophone slip up the instant I hit submit but by then it was too late.
As for the remote, would something like this work? I realize it's branded for Vista but I would think the drivers for a PC remote would be standardized by now. It's not Bluetooth but it is RF so you shouldn't need line of sight, I imagine there are similar solutions using RF out there, that's just the first one I found.
Yeah, I'd do that except the Bush/Obama bailouts took all my money, leaving it in the hands of the corporate sector to go on a buying spree because stock prices tanked wiping out my 401K.
I disagree with this sentiment, by the time the bailouts happened the damage had already been done. A lot of the companies bailed out really would have caused serious damage to national and world economies had they been allowed to fail. The mistake wasn't bailing them out, it was letting them get so large and powerful that their failure would spell doom for global economies.
It would be like complaining about the government using your tax dollars to repair a huge dam that is upriver from your town. The problem isn't that they're using tax dollars to make the repairs, the real problem is that they built the dam in the first place, an error compounded by lack of inspections and regulations over the years that allowed the dam to get so damaged that not repairing it would lead to disaster. Yeah, the company that built the dam should be the one paying for those repairs, (and in this analogy they kind of are since most of the bailout was in the form of loans) but would you really let the dam wash away and destroy the town just to make a point about corporate responsibility?
One of the advantages of the PS3's otherwise ridiculous use of Bluetooth for the DVD remote is that the whole console can be out of site. Mine sits vertically behind the TV which gives it lots of room to breath and since it does triple duty as media server, Blu-Ray player, and gaming console it means that I really don't have much cluttering up my entertainment center; just a cable box and a stereo receiver.
There were three suicides at my college in the four years I went there, and it was a small school with less than 2000 students. That means that we averaged 1 suicide per 2600 students per year. During the worst of Foxconn's suicide 'outbreak' there were 10 completed suicide attempts over a 5 month period out of 960,000 workers. That means 1 suicide for every 80,000 employees per year. So by that measurement, my college was apparently 30x more likely to drive someone to suicide.
Funny that you should choose The Shining as a good screen adaptation. King himself has said that he hated it, that Kubrick made too many large changes to the story, and that it wasn't a good adaptation. I think what you meant was that it's a good movie that was based on Kings book, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good adaptation. Personally, I'd be more interesting in a good rendering of The Long Walk, a book which I found to be an almost pathological mix of interesting and repulsive. Like watching a semi jackknife on a busy highway.
Why someone would trust PayPal, who isn't a bank, with well over half a million dollars is beyond me.
I don't think they did, the summary makes it sound like they kept the balance low but have been locked out of their account for whatever reason and since they were locked out 600,000 Euros (actually more than 3/4 of a million dollars!) has come into the account. They've had no way to remove it, no way to prevent the money coming in short of shutting down their operation, and no way outside of PayPal's customer service to resolve the situation. Honestly, it's almost criminal (or maybe even is criminal, I don't know).
See, I took at as implied that not only will Roland relive the events again, but that he has already lived them many, many times, each time earning (or failing to earn) a small piece of his former life (symbolizing his humanity) to take with him. Maybe the first time he didn't have his original guns, or his hat, or his coin, etc. Roland is doomed to repeat the cycle endlessly until he has enough of his humanity to value his friends over his search for the Tower, the items from his past are meant to remind him off all the people that he's lost due to his search for the tower and other mistakes. I suppose it's possible that he'll eventually do so, but in my imagination it will take dozens of repetitions to do so (even assuming he earns something each time); maybe "Ka is a wheel, but you have a choice to get off from it" would be more accurate.
Don't get me wrong, the ending was perfect. The whole 7 book uber-novel is about two things, the journey to the tower and Roland's character development from heartless asshole bent on revenge to someone his companions could put trust in. From a literary standpoint, it's pretty clear that those two elements are meant to be connected, Roland only ever gets closer to the Tower when he puts his faith in others, helps others, sacrifices for others, etc. (spoiler) Since his character development wasn't complete (his obsession over the tower still overpowered his love for his companions) it doesn't make sense that he should reach the tower either. The idea that Roland has been living the events of the novels over and over again, each time gaining a tiny piece of humanity back (or maybe sometimes not even succeeding that much) is a very powerful idea from a literary standpoint. Of course, try telling that to people that feel they got cheated out of an ending that they read a few thousand pages to reach and they just don't seem to appreciate it.
If it proves popular I can't wait to see people's reaction to the ending (those that aren't familiar with it). It'll make everyone's disappointment in the Lost and Battlestar Galactica finales look like indifference. I know people who are still pissed off about everything that happens after the "don't read past this point" warning. Personally, I laughed out loud at the ending since it basically came down to with thing: "Ka is a wheel bitches! Deal with it."
It's not really very hard to take a space launch system and turn it into an ICBM system, after all the opposite transition is basically how the space industry got its start int he first place (strap a capsule on the top of an ICBM and give it a bit more oomph to make orbit). Now I think that the argument is over what is and isn't commercially available from other countries without export restrictions, and whether the controls should be the same regardless of who you're selling to (does it really make sense to require the same paper work to send a rocket to the UK as it does to say Pakistan?). IMO, once a commercial equivalent to a piece of technology is available, a device should be taken off the ITAR lists, but that isn't the way the system works.
Sometimes the policy is good and sometimes it is bad. Do you really want Iran getting a hold of the blueprints for the shuttles solid rocket boosters? Obviously not, they could be adapted in a matter of months to nefarious purposes. But then there is technology that is by no means cutting edge, in the US or anywhere, that remains on the ITAR restricted lists out of inertia, it doesn't stop enemies from getting a hold of technology, all it does is make US companies less competitive in the global marketplace.
I figured I was already taking a risk since most people that see the movie (myself included if I'm being honest) would never notice that HAL is either wrong or lying, either way is massive foreshadowing for whats coming but done is such a way that only a highly experienced chess player would catch it... the attention to detail is what makes the movie amazing.
The department of Sony that runs their eBook stuff is apparently run quite a bit different from the rest of the company. They support open standards, don't heavily push DRM, and don't try to sue their customers into oblivion. It's a big company with a lot of diversity, I'd bet that 95% of the people that work in the eBook department have no significant contact with people in the games, movies, or music department. For all intents and purposes they may as well be their own company.
Your knee jerk reaction is everything that is wrong with blind idealism. Yes, this is DRM, it's DRM that opens up functionality that would not otherwise be economically feasible or even legally defensible. Do authors deserve to get paid for their work? Because unless they don't, you can't have libraries giving out unlimited, copyable, no-return-required copies of books. This is the only realistic way that libraries will continue to exist in any form if we move towards a 100% digital distribution, an idea that I personally believe isn't as far fetched as a lot of people seem to think it is.
Yep, and Firefox and Chrome have had exploits too. So have Linux, the iOS, and Mac OS 10. So has nearly every piece of popular, complex software. The rate of exploits found that affect Foxit is trivial compared to the number found in Adobe Reader.
If you really need layout to be consistent (and really unless you're printing that seems like an obsolete idea to me) you could use TeX. Considering the original goal was "to provide a system that would give the exact same results on all computers, now and in the future" think it meets your requirements.
Slashdot Mirror
How about a legal distribution system using bittorrent where you get discounts of up to some percentage point if your share ratio is high enough. Yeah, there'd probably be ways to game the system, but if someone is willing to do that then they are probably willing to just download it illegally in the first place. The idea is to put forth a model that is as convenient as illegal downloads for those of us who would prefer to pay the content owners, while still reducing distribution costs to near 0.
Who else was all ready to flame about 4 being used to mean "for"?
Fixed. And I'm legitimately trying to be helpful not just being a pain in the ass, it took me like 30 seconds to figure out what you were trying to say here.
Who picked that map app for the demo? They seriously deserve to be fired, it makes their whole product look like an underpowered piece of garbage. My phone performs better than that...
I don't know, the hinge on the standard convertible tablets is definitely heftier, but it also has the whole screen rotating around a single point, where this is connected at both sides. To me, the added stability of having two hard points instead of one might overwhelm the advantage of having a larger hinge. First and foremost, the hinge in Dell's new one is much simpler, and only needs to spin 180 degrees in one direction. Second, since it's attached at both sides it shouldn't have torque in directions that the hinges aren't designed for. Basically, I'd put more faith in a couple of rotary hinges than I will in a ball in socket type hinge.
How can results be reproduced?
I don't follow how near infinite storage affects the ability of researchers to re-perform an experiment to gather data a second time.
What if the model of the data is as complex as the data?
Then it is, by definition, not a model. A model is a system that describes another system more complex than itself, a model that is as complex as the system it is trying to describe is just different way of looking at the system. It can still be useful, but it doesn't simplify the problem the same way a real model does.
Are all results obtained with Small Data simply artefacts of sparse counts?
Science has had a way to handle that question for centuries, it's called statistics: confidence intervals, standard deviations, etc. Any experimental result could be the result of a freak occurrence, that is why there are official and unofficial confidence interval cutoffs for publishing your results. Even if you had a sample size of one trillion, your confidence in the results could still be quite low.
It should be pretty easy to make a spectrum and say this is more distracting than that, is more distracting than that. At least then you could say that everything on one side of the line is legal and everything on the other side is distracted driving / driving under the influence. If kids are really that distracting then yeah, you'd have to make everything less distracting legal (you're not going to get away with telling parents they can't drive with their kids) but at least things would be consistent.
BTW, talking with a passenger has been shown in studies to be much less distracting than talking on a phone because your passenger will immediately shut up if conditions change and even point out things that the driver might have otherwise missed. Interestingly, the most distracting thing they found was having a passenger talk to someone else on the phone because your brain consciously or unconsciously tries to build up a picture of what the person on the other end is saying.
That's great, so whoever is in charge at the moment gets to decide which results get published. Why, they should fund a study to see which political party's policy will be best for the economy. That way everyone in the country will know for sure which party they should vote for... as long as it happens to be the one in charge, otherwise no one will ever see the results.
How are you supposed to convince others that the people in charge are wrong when the people in charge decide what information is available? You need access to information that shows them to be wrong, something that this law appears on the face to be designed to prevent. We've always been at war with Eastasia, and here's a historian that will corroborate that statement if you don't believe me.
What I read it as is that you will never hear anything from a government scientist that doesn't support the government agenda. It means that government scientists cannot realistically be treated as unbiased sources, the same way you wouldn't trust a tobacco funded study on the effects of cigarets. Would you really trust a government funded scientist's on the possible ecological damage caused by harvesting the oil sands if the current government's agenda had that as item number one? Most people would question that relationship anyway, but this new requirement makes it all but official; if you take government grant money, you will only publish results that agree with the government's stances.
Yeah, I noticed my homophone slip up the instant I hit submit but by then it was too late.
As for the remote, would something like this work? I realize it's branded for Vista but I would think the drivers for a PC remote would be standardized by now. It's not Bluetooth but it is RF so you shouldn't need line of sight, I imagine there are similar solutions using RF out there, that's just the first one I found.
Yeah, I'd do that except the Bush/Obama bailouts took all my money, leaving it in the hands of the corporate sector to go on a buying spree because stock prices tanked wiping out my 401K.
I disagree with this sentiment, by the time the bailouts happened the damage had already been done. A lot of the companies bailed out really would have caused serious damage to national and world economies had they been allowed to fail. The mistake wasn't bailing them out, it was letting them get so large and powerful that their failure would spell doom for global economies.
It would be like complaining about the government using your tax dollars to repair a huge dam that is upriver from your town. The problem isn't that they're using tax dollars to make the repairs, the real problem is that they built the dam in the first place, an error compounded by lack of inspections and regulations over the years that allowed the dam to get so damaged that not repairing it would lead to disaster. Yeah, the company that built the dam should be the one paying for those repairs, (and in this analogy they kind of are since most of the bailout was in the form of loans) but would you really let the dam wash away and destroy the town just to make a point about corporate responsibility?
One of the advantages of the PS3's otherwise ridiculous use of Bluetooth for the DVD remote is that the whole console can be out of site. Mine sits vertically behind the TV which gives it lots of room to breath and since it does triple duty as media server, Blu-Ray player, and gaming console it means that I really don't have much cluttering up my entertainment center; just a cable box and a stereo receiver.
There were three suicides at my college in the four years I went there, and it was a small school with less than 2000 students. That means that we averaged 1 suicide per 2600 students per year. During the worst of Foxconn's suicide 'outbreak' there were 10 completed suicide attempts over a 5 month period out of 960,000 workers. That means 1 suicide for every 80,000 employees per year. So by that measurement, my college was apparently 30x more likely to drive someone to suicide.
Funny that you should choose The Shining as a good screen adaptation. King himself has said that he hated it, that Kubrick made too many large changes to the story, and that it wasn't a good adaptation. I think what you meant was that it's a good movie that was based on Kings book, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good adaptation. Personally, I'd be more interesting in a good rendering of The Long Walk, a book which I found to be an almost pathological mix of interesting and repulsive. Like watching a semi jackknife on a busy highway.
Why someone would trust PayPal, who isn't a bank, with well over half a million dollars is beyond me.
I don't think they did, the summary makes it sound like they kept the balance low but have been locked out of their account for whatever reason and since they were locked out 600,000 Euros (actually more than 3/4 of a million dollars!) has come into the account. They've had no way to remove it, no way to prevent the money coming in short of shutting down their operation, and no way outside of PayPal's customer service to resolve the situation. Honestly, it's almost criminal (or maybe even is criminal, I don't know).
See, I took at as implied that not only will Roland relive the events again, but that he has already lived them many, many times, each time earning (or failing to earn) a small piece of his former life (symbolizing his humanity) to take with him. Maybe the first time he didn't have his original guns, or his hat, or his coin, etc. Roland is doomed to repeat the cycle endlessly until he has enough of his humanity to value his friends over his search for the Tower, the items from his past are meant to remind him off all the people that he's lost due to his search for the tower and other mistakes. I suppose it's possible that he'll eventually do so, but in my imagination it will take dozens of repetitions to do so (even assuming he earns something each time); maybe "Ka is a wheel, but you have a choice to get off from it" would be more accurate.
Don't get me wrong, the ending was perfect. The whole 7 book uber-novel is about two things, the journey to the tower and Roland's character development from heartless asshole bent on revenge to someone his companions could put trust in. From a literary standpoint, it's pretty clear that those two elements are meant to be connected, Roland only ever gets closer to the Tower when he puts his faith in others, helps others, sacrifices for others, etc. (spoiler) Since his character development wasn't complete (his obsession over the tower still overpowered his love for his companions) it doesn't make sense that he should reach the tower either. The idea that Roland has been living the events of the novels over and over again, each time gaining a tiny piece of humanity back (or maybe sometimes not even succeeding that much) is a very powerful idea from a literary standpoint. Of course, try telling that to people that feel they got cheated out of an ending that they read a few thousand pages to reach and they just don't seem to appreciate it.
If it proves popular I can't wait to see people's reaction to the ending (those that aren't familiar with it). It'll make everyone's disappointment in the Lost and Battlestar Galactica finales look like indifference. I know people who are still pissed off about everything that happens after the "don't read past this point" warning. Personally, I laughed out loud at the ending since it basically came down to with thing: "Ka is a wheel bitches! Deal with it."
It's not really very hard to take a space launch system and turn it into an ICBM system, after all the opposite transition is basically how the space industry got its start int he first place (strap a capsule on the top of an ICBM and give it a bit more oomph to make orbit). Now I think that the argument is over what is and isn't commercially available from other countries without export restrictions, and whether the controls should be the same regardless of who you're selling to (does it really make sense to require the same paper work to send a rocket to the UK as it does to say Pakistan?). IMO, once a commercial equivalent to a piece of technology is available, a device should be taken off the ITAR lists, but that isn't the way the system works.
Sometimes the policy is good and sometimes it is bad. Do you really want Iran getting a hold of the blueprints for the shuttles solid rocket boosters? Obviously not, they could be adapted in a matter of months to nefarious purposes. But then there is technology that is by no means cutting edge, in the US or anywhere, that remains on the ITAR restricted lists out of inertia, it doesn't stop enemies from getting a hold of technology, all it does is make US companies less competitive in the global marketplace.
I figured I was already taking a risk since most people that see the movie (myself included if I'm being honest) would never notice that HAL is either wrong or lying, either way is massive foreshadowing for whats coming but done is such a way that only a highly experienced chess player would catch it... the attention to detail is what makes the movie amazing.
The department of Sony that runs their eBook stuff is apparently run quite a bit different from the rest of the company. They support open standards, don't heavily push DRM, and don't try to sue their customers into oblivion. It's a big company with a lot of diversity, I'd bet that 95% of the people that work in the eBook department have no significant contact with people in the games, movies, or music department. For all intents and purposes they may as well be their own company.
Your knee jerk reaction is everything that is wrong with blind idealism. Yes, this is DRM, it's DRM that opens up functionality that would not otherwise be economically feasible or even legally defensible. Do authors deserve to get paid for their work? Because unless they don't, you can't have libraries giving out unlimited, copyable, no-return-required copies of books. This is the only realistic way that libraries will continue to exist in any form if we move towards a 100% digital distribution, an idea that I personally believe isn't as far fetched as a lot of people seem to think it is.
HAL - "I'm sorry, Frank, I think you missed it. Queen to Bishop 3, Bishop takes Queen, Knight takes Bishop. Mate."
Lies! Lies I tell you!
Yep, and Firefox and Chrome have had exploits too. So have Linux, the iOS, and Mac OS 10. So has nearly every piece of popular, complex software. The rate of exploits found that affect Foxit is trivial compared to the number found in Adobe Reader.
If you really need layout to be consistent (and really unless you're printing that seems like an obsolete idea to me) you could use TeX. Considering the original goal was "to provide a system that would give the exact same results on all computers, now and in the future" think it meets your requirements.