regardless as to whether it's the best way of expressing their message.
Close, but that isn't quite what I said. More accurate would be "...regardless as to whether it's the easy way of expressing their message". There will always be times when going against the code will make the better story, but I feel that rather than making the story better it often just makes the story easier to write, which is a hard thing for most authors to resist.
If you want your main character to be a criminal for instance, the easy way to do things is to have the criminal succeed and get rich off his crimes. With the code you can't do that, a criminal can't profit from his crimes, so what to do? You have to come up with other ways of having him 'win', through personal relationships, character growth, overcoming adversity, etc.
I don't know, it seems to me that often the best stories are written when the authors hands are tied a little bit. Typically, code or no code, the author will get the message out that they're trying to get out, but with the code in place it puts a check on the author, preventing him or her from taking the easy way to make their point. It encourages authors to look at both sides of situation more thoroughly than they would have otherwise which in my opinion adds more depth to the story.
The fact that conversion rates are higher would seem to indicate that the advertisements are more interesting and/or relevant to the user, something that the user has been claiming that they wanted since we all accepted that advertising was acceptable. I say that users have been claiming that that is what they wanted because the reality is that users just wanted to complain about advertising in general but realized that the sites the enjoy are ad supported so they feel guilty about complaining about the ads directly.
It's even simpler than that, Wikipedia is the site that anyone can edit. That means that it's entirely possible for the prosecutor to log into Wikipedia, change an article so that it supports his arguments, add fakes cites out to hard to verify material, then take his research from there. Why any educated lawyer would think that you could use Wikipedia for anything more than the most basic of a starting point for research is beyond me.
Just like the phrase "throw the baby out with the bathwater" would indicate that the situation involves babies, baths, and infanticide. Yes, the meaning of X times smaller isn't totally clear, that's because it's an idiom. It's been in use since before your great-great-grandparents were born and it's just one of those things that you have to define in terms of the whole phrase rather than the individual words that make it up.
Jail Break City, where people who bought your crap can enjoy it how they want
Unless of course if 'they want' to log into the PSN or play on Sony's servers. Just saying, there's plenty that Sony can do, especially since this is the only hack available and it can apparently be detected server side.
Many different angles, but all of them are full of win.
A) Embarrass the writer of the crack B) Point out that the crack doesn't work as well as the real thing C) Get your product's name out there D) Show the people who care about this kind of thing that you're a 'cool guy' E) Not waste time and effort trying to get the crack removed.
Actually, the project kind of does beg the question "why would anyone want this". The project assumes the answer to the question is that people are afraid of migrating to Linux because it is unfamiliar or that people prefer the windows UI to the available Linux UIs. Without that assumption the project is worthless and wouldn't have been done, so it is safe to say that those who did the work did beg the question after all.
That seems pretty contradictory to me. If someone raises a question, they are inviting you to think about the possible answers. If someone begs the question, they are trying to get you to assume the answer that supports your argument. It might be possible to raise the question and then assume the answer, but to me those are two separate actions not something you can do in a single statement.
You've got to admit, it's pretty frustrating when there are two meanings for a phrase and the meanings are contradictory. I suppose it's happened before (for example, there was a time when a foregone conclusion was one that was so unlikely you may as well not think about it, now it is a one that is so likely you may as well not fight against it) but I still cringe whenever I hear it said this way.
Actually, California is the only state with a precedent (people v. Freeman) on record differentiating the production of pornography from prostitution, it's one of the reasons that the vast majority of porn made is the US is made in California. When you think about it, the distinction doesn't really make much sense; paying for sex is illegal... unless you film it with the intent to sell the video, in which case it's fine.
Luckily the detected difference is somewhere around.0001% so I don't think we'll be rewriting history even if their observation is confirmed. Such a small change really makes me wonder if they've actually done the statistical analysis on the results to make sure that they are significant. I'd bet that they will find some relatively run of the mill explanation the explain the changes; something like the detector's efficiency changing based on humidity or temperature. Although something like that would go a long way to explaining seasonal variations, it might be harder to explain the changes that were detected during solar storms/calms.
Of course, it would be more interesting if this is a real effect. After all, "That's strange" is much more exciting than "We were right".
Re:I hope they're smarter than the article writer
on
Low Energy Supercomputing
·
· Score: 1, Redundant
Only problem is that the Ampere is a unit of CURRENT, not energy. It's like saying someone weighs 686 Newtons.
Wait... what? Newtons are a unit of force, weight is force due to gravity. Maybe you meant that it's like saying something weighs X kg or something masses X Newtons?
They're not talking about the couple hours at the end of the day where people do their hobbies and relax, they're talking about the minute here, minute there kind of downtime throughout the day. They're talking about leaning back in your chair and stretching out for a few minutes, waiting to hear back on a question you asked your co-worker, or just sitting on the damn toilet (we all know people who can't help but get out their phones while they're taking a crap).
Don't know if you're being serious or not, so I'll be as succinct as possible. The fastest that a message can be sent to or from anywhere is the speed of light, which might be fast enough for you to waldo a robot on the other side of the planet, but even going out as far as the moon would be a frustrating experience, asking your robot arm to move and it doesn't respond for a few seconds. Sending information (or a physical object obviously) faster than the speed of light leads to violations of causality, which every experiment and human experience today has indicated isn't how the world works.
I love modern technology, but it seems to be feeding a growing segment of the population with no desire for creativity or imagination. Read a book, people!
Or at least go play Dwarf Fortress. That's probably the only 'modern' game that I know of where the ability to construct a mental 3D view of the world from 2D slices is essential to success.
Not getting the same exact results every time would mean that the test is very imprecise but not necessarily inaccurate. If the averages work out over many samples so that some wines are clearly favored where others are not, it would still be significant even if you don't get the exact same results with every test.
Later on in the same article it is stated that statisticians analyzed the results and found that the top two wines were the only ones that was statistically different in ranking from the other ones. Now granted, they had a pretty small sample size, but if you can't statistically differentiate quality with almost a dozen tasters I think you have some real problems.
I Put it through the BS to English translator and I got this
I have disabled Comments on this post so that people who believe everything I tell them do not have to read remarks made by a large number of scientifically and technically literate individuals who cannot tolerate people lying to and defrauding their customers.
You actually have to pull your card through a magnetic strip skimmer in order for it to work and even a cursory glance can generally spot them. An RFID skimmer on the other hand can be out of sight, even inside the actual reader itself if there is enough room.
It's hardly vendors that I would be concerned about. Given the increase in skimmers for magnetic readers at ATMs and cash registers how long do you really think before the concept spreads to RFID skimmers?
Actually phone conversation I've had (multiple times in face):
Me: Hello? Him: Hey what HDMI cable should I buy? Me: The cheapest ones you can find? Him: Really? Because they have some for $30 and some for $90, aren't the $90 ones better? Me: Where are you? Him: Best Buy, they have the good stuff. Me: Just turn around and leave, buy them off the internet for $5, or at least go to Target or Walmart. Him: But they have some for $90 here, they wouldn't charge more if they weren't better.
If you can feel where the RFID chip is in the card you can crush it (assuming it is the only chip that your card has of course). I've done this accidentally with my ID card at work, a simple pair of pliers should do the trick and you'll never have to worry about it again.
Nope, his handlers have reigned him in and told him he sounded like a wingnut conspiracy theorist. Just a few days after his comments he had this to say when asked by the news station: "I haven't even had the time to visit the terms of the agreement that Mayor Hickenlooper has signed off on. I am gonna beg a little patience from the media, so I can study the details of this program and then make a much more informed commentary about it."
In other words, "I made a ridiculous accusation without even so much as reading the law I was talking about. Please, please, please ignore what I said earlier while I stall for time until this whole thing blows over."
Slashdot Mirror
regardless as to whether it's the best way of expressing their message.
Close, but that isn't quite what I said. More accurate would be "...regardless as to whether it's the easy way of expressing their message". There will always be times when going against the code will make the better story, but I feel that rather than making the story better it often just makes the story easier to write, which is a hard thing for most authors to resist.
If you want your main character to be a criminal for instance, the easy way to do things is to have the criminal succeed and get rich off his crimes. With the code you can't do that, a criminal can't profit from his crimes, so what to do? You have to come up with other ways of having him 'win', through personal relationships, character growth, overcoming adversity, etc.
I don't know, it seems to me that often the best stories are written when the authors hands are tied a little bit. Typically, code or no code, the author will get the message out that they're trying to get out, but with the code in place it puts a check on the author, preventing him or her from taking the easy way to make their point. It encourages authors to look at both sides of situation more thoroughly than they would have otherwise which in my opinion adds more depth to the story.
The fact that conversion rates are higher would seem to indicate that the advertisements are more interesting and/or relevant to the user, something that the user has been claiming that they wanted since we all accepted that advertising was acceptable. I say that users have been claiming that that is what they wanted because the reality is that users just wanted to complain about advertising in general but realized that the sites the enjoy are ad supported so they feel guilty about complaining about the ads directly.
It's even simpler than that, Wikipedia is the site that anyone can edit. That means that it's entirely possible for the prosecutor to log into Wikipedia, change an article so that it supports his arguments, add fakes cites out to hard to verify material, then take his research from there. Why any educated lawyer would think that you could use Wikipedia for anything more than the most basic of a starting point for research is beyond me.
I know I would trust General Jim's Defense System and Admiral Bob's National Security to keep my family safe at night.
Just like the phrase "throw the baby out with the bathwater" would indicate that the situation involves babies, baths, and infanticide. Yes, the meaning of X times smaller isn't totally clear, that's because it's an idiom. It's been in use since before your great-great-grandparents were born and it's just one of those things that you have to define in terms of the whole phrase rather than the individual words that make it up.
Jail Break City, where people who bought your crap can enjoy it how they want
Unless of course if 'they want' to log into the PSN or play on Sony's servers. Just saying, there's plenty that Sony can do, especially since this is the only hack available and it can apparently be detected server side.
Many different angles, but all of them are full of win.
A) Embarrass the writer of the crack
B) Point out that the crack doesn't work as well as the real thing
C) Get your product's name out there
D) Show the people who care about this kind of thing that you're a 'cool guy'
E) Not waste time and effort trying to get the crack removed.
Did I miss anything?
Actually, the project kind of does beg the question "why would anyone want this". The project assumes the answer to the question is that people are afraid of migrating to Linux because it is unfamiliar or that people prefer the windows UI to the available Linux UIs. Without that assumption the project is worthless and wouldn't have been done, so it is safe to say that those who did the work did beg the question after all.
That seems pretty contradictory to me. If someone raises a question, they are inviting you to think about the possible answers. If someone begs the question, they are trying to get you to assume the answer that supports your argument. It might be possible to raise the question and then assume the answer, but to me those are two separate actions not something you can do in a single statement.
You've got to admit, it's pretty frustrating when there are two meanings for a phrase and the meanings are contradictory. I suppose it's happened before (for example, there was a time when a foregone conclusion was one that was so unlikely you may as well not think about it, now it is a one that is so likely you may as well not fight against it) but I still cringe whenever I hear it said this way.
Actually, California is the only state with a precedent (people v. Freeman) on record differentiating the production of pornography from prostitution, it's one of the reasons that the vast majority of porn made is the US is made in California. When you think about it, the distinction doesn't really make much sense; paying for sex is illegal... unless you film it with the intent to sell the video, in which case it's fine.
Luckily the detected difference is somewhere around .0001% so I don't think we'll be rewriting history even if their observation is confirmed. Such a small change really makes me wonder if they've actually done the statistical analysis on the results to make sure that they are significant. I'd bet that they will find some relatively run of the mill explanation the explain the changes; something like the detector's efficiency changing based on humidity or temperature. Although something like that would go a long way to explaining seasonal variations, it might be harder to explain the changes that were detected during solar storms/calms.
Of course, it would be more interesting if this is a real effect. After all, "That's strange" is much more exciting than "We were right".
IAAUGL
I Am An Underpants Gnome Lawyer?
Only problem is that the Ampere is a unit of CURRENT, not energy. It's like saying someone weighs 686 Newtons.
Wait... what? Newtons are a unit of force, weight is force due to gravity. Maybe you meant that it's like saying something weighs X kg or something masses X Newtons?
They're not talking about the couple hours at the end of the day where people do their hobbies and relax, they're talking about the minute here, minute there kind of downtime throughout the day. They're talking about leaning back in your chair and stretching out for a few minutes, waiting to hear back on a question you asked your co-worker, or just sitting on the damn toilet (we all know people who can't help but get out their phones while they're taking a crap).
Don't know if you're being serious or not, so I'll be as succinct as possible. The fastest that a message can be sent to or from anywhere is the speed of light, which might be fast enough for you to waldo a robot on the other side of the planet, but even going out as far as the moon would be a frustrating experience, asking your robot arm to move and it doesn't respond for a few seconds. Sending information (or a physical object obviously) faster than the speed of light leads to violations of causality, which every experiment and human experience today has indicated isn't how the world works.
I love modern technology, but it seems to be feeding a growing segment of the population with no desire for creativity or imagination. Read a book, people!
Or at least go play Dwarf Fortress. That's probably the only 'modern' game that I know of where the ability to construct a mental 3D view of the world from 2D slices is essential to success.
Not getting the same exact results every time would mean that the test is very imprecise but not necessarily inaccurate. If the averages work out over many samples so that some wines are clearly favored where others are not, it would still be significant even if you don't get the exact same results with every test.
Later on in the same article it is stated that statisticians analyzed the results and found that the top two wines were the only ones that was statistically different in ranking from the other ones. Now granted, they had a pretty small sample size, but if you can't statistically differentiate quality with almost a dozen tasters I think you have some real problems.
I Put it through the BS to English translator and I got this
I have disabled Comments on this post so that people who believe everything I tell them do not have to read remarks made by a large number of scientifically and technically literate individuals who cannot tolerate people lying to and defrauding their customers.
You actually have to pull your card through a magnetic strip skimmer in order for it to work and even a cursory glance can generally spot them. An RFID skimmer on the other hand can be out of sight, even inside the actual reader itself if there is enough room.
It's hardly vendors that I would be concerned about. Given the increase in skimmers for magnetic readers at ATMs and cash registers how long do you really think before the concept spreads to RFID skimmers?
Actually phone conversation I've had (multiple times in face):
Me: Hello?
Him: Hey what HDMI cable should I buy?
Me: The cheapest ones you can find?
Him: Really? Because they have some for $30 and some for $90, aren't the $90 ones better?
Me: Where are you?
Him: Best Buy, they have the good stuff.
Me: Just turn around and leave, buy them off the internet for $5, or at least go to Target or Walmart.
Him: But they have some for $90 here, they wouldn't charge more if they weren't better.
etc. etc. etc.
If you can feel where the RFID chip is in the card you can crush it (assuming it is the only chip that your card has of course). I've done this accidentally with my ID card at work, a simple pair of pliers should do the trick and you'll never have to worry about it again.
Nope, his handlers have reigned him in and told him he sounded like a wingnut conspiracy theorist. Just a few days after his comments he had this to say when asked by the news station: "I haven't even had the time to visit the terms of the agreement that Mayor Hickenlooper has signed off on. I am gonna beg a little patience from the media, so I can study the details of this program and then make a much more informed commentary about it."
In other words, "I made a ridiculous accusation without even so much as reading the law I was talking about. Please, please, please ignore what I said earlier while I stall for time until this whole thing blows over."