I don't have any numbers to back this up, but the way I've heard it end of life care cost is much higher in the US than in Europe or elsewhere. Not just absolute but also relative to total health care cost. You're wrong. The amount of people in the US that state they want doctors to do everything they can to stay alive a few more days is staggering. Even if it will make them miserable, and success of treatment is measured in adding days to the cancer patient's life, by slowing the progression (while getting the patient more and more sick), not in how it cures them of anything. Ask any cancer doctor: there is a rather large very religious group of US residents that doesn't care about suffering and just does not want to die. So millions are wasted to add suffering and paradoxically postpone their trip to heaven, wasting money that can save other people's live in the process. I believe, like many others have stated, that the time to pull the plug on a terminally ill patient is when they don't want life anymore. Now this won't affect cost here in the US much unless that terribly large religious subset (please, I'm not talking all religious people, don't get me wrong) stops fearing death so much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory
It should be easy to stay under 700 Mb, even with x. Just don't install gnome/kde , but do xfce or lxde instead. you can even get to lenny (current stable version) by changing/etc/apt/sources and apt-get dist-upgrade.
Glad they set the cut-off at 40 then, honestly there is nobody in the world with a bmi that high who is not extremely fat.
There are no borderline cases anymore when you get beyond 35.
Bmi is a bad measure for individual cases, because healthy muscularly people might fall into the wrong category, but when we are talking a population and we are talking a bmi of 40 there is no discussion.
But it can't. The test does most likely not correlate with actual behavior at all.
To just say it bluntly: almost all personality tests are completely unreliable, the best ones are at most somewhat reliable. This means that most people, when they do the same personality test some time later, score differently. This is a terrible problem, as the point of these tests often is to measure a personality, something presumably stable over time. If a test used to measure a trait gives unreliable test results, it apparently can not be measuring a stable trait, and what it does measure can not be used as a predictor of behavior! Even the traits as measured in the Myers-Briggs questionnaire (the most used test in this country to measure personality) have terrible issues with reliability (for an easy quick link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-briggs#Reliability). A lack of reliability in a measure is extremely problematic when the measure is used for predictions, as lacking reliability literally means lacking predictive power.
Now this poor reliability I mentioned is the test-retest reliability, the reliability for a test to predict itself in the future. that being bad is made even worse because more often than not these tests are used to predict actual behavior. And the reliability of any pen-and-paper test to predict actual behavior is even worse than the retest reliability.
This problem of low reliability is the biggest issue and concerns all personality scores ever made. However, most tests, unlike the big five or the Myers-Briggs tests, suffer from horrible validity issues as well. Any ad hoc test created by employers is probably not even measuring what it's intended to measure due to it's creators not doing a proper factor analysis and such to test for underlying constructs, etc. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) )
So besides being non-predictive of anything, these tests are not even measuring anything useful if they were.
Could you clarify this distinction you make between the passive aggression of listening to pantera and active aggression that video games 'are'? Does this mean passively watching violent movies is also passive aggression? And killing a mosquito is active aggression? It sounds more like personal preference to me, clad in nice sounding terms.
It's been shown in many sound social psychological studies over decades that in children there is a strong correlation between watching violent tv and aggressive behavior, between playing violent video-games and aggressive behavior and between listening to aggressive music and aggressive behavior. Go google (google scolar) yourself or look it up on wikipedia.
--There has never been any study proving a causal relationship between these (with behavior being the dependent factor) where the effect lasts for more than a few minutes. --
The catharsis theory ("I go to martial arts school so I don't have to be violent at home", "I listen to pantera once I'm at home so I can be more calm when I'm at work") is a Freudian theory disproved ages ago as well. I'm sure people can peruse the relevant social and personality psychology literature themselves on this. (journal of personality and social psychology, etc. )
to: info@demconvention.com Edit as necessary, feel free to copy and paste
---
Dear Sir/ Madam:
When I attempt to check out any of the upcoming streams on the democratic convention website, I am presented with an error.
This error is due to the fact that silverlight is used to present videos. Silverlight however is only compatible with a few operating systems or browsers, preventing millions of interested people from watching the videos available. For more information, see here (http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/25/1545246) or here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverlight#Compatibility)
Please ask your developers to either switch to flash, or use a more universal solution like h.264 in an mp4 container.
Also, silverlight is created by a company that has a record of breaking the law multiple times, even recently. You may not want to be associated with that company as a political party.
I did not try to start a flamewar with my post.
The point I was trying to make was indeed that in answer two, when Ron (or those representing him) stated
The American people should expect clear and direct answers to their questions. Not only have I always strived to clearly state my position on issues, but my voting record backs up my commitment to the free-market, limited government philosophy I espouse on the campaign trail.
it is explicitly said that he says he strives to clearly state his position.
The answer to question one is hardly a direct or clear response.
Question one actually consisted of 2 questions:
First part: how should America respond to growing technological boldness? The answer given was "America should stop subsidizing the defenses of the rest of the world" this answer used here is not a direct answer to the question at all!
It is an answer that could be used for any question relating the rest of the world.
If I were to ask what should America do about the Civil wars in Africa, child labor in India, drug policy in Holland, an alien invasion; same answer would work and it would hardly be less or more relevant to the question!
To be a clear answer, the answer has to entail explaining why stopping subsidizing the defense of the rest of the world has anything to do with the growth of technological boldness in countries like China!
Does it mean the U.S. stops defending of countries like china in particular? Are we actually defending China, and countries like it at this time that we should stop? What does it mean, really? It's not clear!
Second part: Is it a threat or an opportunity?
As someone else mentioned, this question can have either of for answers:
threat, here's why
opportunity, here's why
neither, here's why
both, here's why
None of these 4 possible answers was given there, so that's not clear either.
Honestly, I don't know much about any of the U.S. candidates, I'm not from here. And asking a political candidate to be clear is by definition a trick question. Any one of them would have fallen for this, republican or democrat, U.S. politician or not.
Of course this counts for questions 3,4 and 5 as well but I mainly got requests to clarify my first statement.
Due to the way wordperfect and word differ in where they store the formatting information; this is stored above each paragraph in word, and at the place where it needs to be applied (like in html without a stylesheet) in wordperfect, a reveal formatting screen like the underwaterscreen is impossible in word. There was a product called crosseyes that would try to emulate this feature in word for people addicted to this thing, but it was not at all as powerful as the thing built in WP. This reveal formatting window you describe that exists in word 2003 is even less powerful than that. In the WP screen, absolutely every piece of formatting code, where it starts, stops, what text it applies to, etc. is shown and can be deleted, copied, cut and moved to different parts of the document. Here's a (small) screen shot I found with google: http://media.wiley.com/assets/194/92/0-7645-4352-0_000300.jpg/ which might illustrate it a bit.
Any slashdot article that's bitching about microsoft word needs at least one person sadly referring to the wordperfect reveal codes option they so miss. I didn't see it being referred to yet so here I am, karma in hand. (Knowing it's off topic and all)
I guess I'll finally bow down to the masses, this will be my last cry for the good old days of the reveal codes screen. The alt-F3, the underwaterscreen as we used to call it... whether due to mass ignorance, evil microsoft package deals, or maybe we reveal codes lovers were just the weird ones, and the word meta-information handling won due to it's actual superiority. I don't know, but it's absolutely too late now, and I need to let it go.
But why why why does openoffice emulate that Word crap to the extent that when using that suite you run into the exact same horrible formatting issues! Press backspace, and suddenly the whole text document is bold. You can't get that picture to move down one line, unless you want the formatting of 2 paragraphs to turn into a complete mess, and blank pages added. Why why why?
I want my underwaterscreen! Please god give me the strength to let this go and not long for something archaic and so much better than everything the rest of the world uses for some weird reason. I mean, there even was a time when word perfect 8 was available on linux! where did that time go?!
Ok that was it, I promise I'll never rant about that again.
I hope I can do this.
If I add secure encryption WPA on top of that it'll be much better right? the best security is as you suggest yourself:
... no wireless broadcasting at all... But if you choose to have wireless then the only security measure that actually adds significant security is WPA.
If you incorporate that, SSID broadcasting can be back on, dhcp as well, and you can turn off mac filtering as these measures do not add anything security-wise and do create hassles in setting up. (and as I said before can slow down your network.)
A resource to back up some of my claims: http://www.tisc-insight.com/newsletters/416.html
I'm not sure if your post is serious as these questions have been answered many times in slashdot.
Hiding your ESSID, not using DHCP and using MAC address filtering are insufficient in adding security as they are all part of any exchange between the router and wireless connections.
The MAC address of existing machines can be found and copied in seconds. The ESSID and IP address can be found very easily as well.
Hacking WEP encryption is also trivial.
As a security measure, all these are completely pointless, and do not add anything in terms of security.
Hiding your ESSID does decrease your wireless performance.
The only security measure that has any real effect in protecting your wireless network from people who really want to get in is using secure encryption. (WPA, etc.)
Slashdot Mirror
pragmatism, that's what it was. Look up the definition. Although saying 'be pragmatic' is not as quotable as saying be dumb' and meaning be pragmatic.
I don't have any numbers to back this up, but the way I've heard it end of life care cost is much higher in the US than in Europe or elsewhere. Not just absolute but also relative to total health care cost. You're wrong.
The amount of people in the US that state they want doctors to do everything they can to stay alive a few more days is staggering. Even if it will make them miserable, and success of treatment is measured in adding days to the cancer patient's life, by slowing the progression (while getting the patient more and more sick), not in how it cures them of anything.
Ask any cancer doctor: there is a rather large very religious group of US residents that doesn't care about suffering and just does not want to die. So millions are wasted to add suffering and paradoxically postpone their trip to heaven, wasting money that can save other people's live in the process.
I believe, like many others have stated, that the time to pull the plug on a terminally ill patient is when they don't want life anymore. Now this won't affect cost here in the US much unless that terribly large religious subset (please, I'm not talking all religious people, don't get me wrong) stops fearing death so much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory
Indeed, the oldstable (etch) version of debian, which is still supported wrt security has floppy images.
For example, these can be found here: http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/dists/etch/main/installer-i386/current/images/floppy/
It should be easy to stay under 700 Mb, even with x. Just don't install gnome/kde , but do xfce or lxde instead. /etc/apt/sources and apt-get dist-upgrade.
you can even get to lenny (current stable version) by changing
All this talk about legality becomes quite ironic when you consider Philips is actually a Dutch company where pot is semi-legal.....
Glad they set the cut-off at 40 then, honestly there is nobody in the world with a bmi that high who is not extremely fat.
There are no borderline cases anymore when you get beyond 35.
Bmi is a bad measure for individual cases, because healthy muscularly people might fall into the wrong category, but when we are talking a population and we are talking a bmi of 40 there is no discussion.
But it can't. The test does most likely not correlate with actual behavior at all.
To just say it bluntly: almost all personality tests are completely unreliable, the best ones are at most somewhat reliable. This means that most people, when they do the same personality test some time later, score differently. This is a terrible problem, as the point of these tests often is to measure a personality, something presumably stable over time. If a test used to measure a trait gives unreliable test results, it apparently can not be measuring a stable trait, and what it does measure can not be used as a predictor of behavior! Even the traits as measured in the Myers-Briggs questionnaire (the most used test in this country to measure personality) have terrible issues with reliability (for an easy quick link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-briggs#Reliability). A lack of reliability in a measure is extremely problematic when the measure is used for predictions, as lacking reliability literally means lacking predictive power.
Now this poor reliability I mentioned is the test-retest reliability, the reliability for a test to predict itself in the future. that being bad is made even worse because more often than not these tests are used to predict actual behavior. And the reliability of any pen-and-paper test to predict actual behavior is even worse than the retest reliability.
This problem of low reliability is the biggest issue and concerns all personality scores ever made. However, most tests, unlike the big five or the Myers-Briggs tests, suffer from horrible validity issues as well. Any ad hoc test created by employers is probably not even measuring what it's intended to measure due to it's creators not doing a proper factor analysis and such to test for underlying constructs, etc. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_(statistics) )
So besides being non-predictive of anything, these tests are not even measuring anything useful if they were.
Could you clarify this distinction you make between the passive aggression of listening to pantera and active aggression that video games 'are'?
Does this mean passively watching violent movies is also passive aggression? And killing a mosquito is active aggression?
It sounds more like personal preference to me, clad in nice sounding terms.
It's been shown in many sound social psychological studies over decades that in children there is a strong correlation between watching violent tv and aggressive behavior, between playing violent video-games and aggressive behavior and between listening to aggressive music and aggressive behavior.
Go google (google scolar) yourself or look it up on wikipedia.
--There has never been any study proving a causal relationship between these (with behavior being the dependent factor) where the effect lasts for more than a few minutes. --
The catharsis theory ("I go to martial arts school so I don't have to be violent at home", "I listen to pantera once I'm at home so I can be more calm when I'm at work") is a Freudian theory disproved ages ago as well. I'm sure people can peruse the relevant social and personality psychology literature themselves on this. (journal of personality and social psychology, etc. )
run sysv-rc-conf, remove gdm BOOM 30 seconds off of your ubuntu boot time and ready to edit with vi/pico/nano, etc. How hard was that?
firefox lite, aka K-meleon exists, thank you very much
to: info@demconvention.com
Edit as necessary, feel free to copy and paste
---
Dear Sir/ Madam:
When I attempt to check out any of the upcoming streams on the democratic convention website, I am presented with an error.
This error is due to the fact that silverlight is used to present videos. Silverlight however is only compatible with a few operating systems or browsers, preventing millions of interested people from watching the videos available.
For more information, see here (http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/25/1545246)
or here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverlight#Compatibility)
Please ask your developers to either switch to flash, or use a more universal solution like h.264 in an mp4 container.
Also, silverlight is created by a company that has a record of breaking the law multiple times, even recently. You may not want to be associated with that company as a political party.
thanks,
maarten
Mod parent up as funny. It is a joke. Even it it was not intended as one by the poster.
reminds me of a despair.com poster
http://www.despair.com/motivation.html
- First part: how should America respond to growing technological boldness?
- Second part: Is it a threat or an opportunity?
Honestly, I don't know much about any of the U.S. candidates, I'm not from here. And asking a political candidate to be clear is by definition a trick question. Any one of them would have fallen for this, republican or democrat, U.S. politician or not.The answer given was "America should stop subsidizing the defenses of the rest of the world" this answer used here is not a direct answer to the question at all!
It is an answer that could be used for any question relating the rest of the world.
If I were to ask what should America do about the Civil wars in Africa, child labor in India, drug policy in Holland, an alien invasion; same answer would work and it would hardly be less or more relevant to the question!
To be a clear answer, the answer has to entail explaining why stopping subsidizing the defense of the rest of the world has anything to do with the growth of technological boldness in countries like China!
Does it mean the U.S. stops defending of countries like china in particular? Are we actually defending China, and countries like it at this time that we should stop?
What does it mean, really? It's not clear!
As someone else mentioned, this question can have either of for answers:
- threat, here's why
- opportunity, here's why
- neither, here's why
- both, here's why
None of these 4 possible answers was given there, so that's not clear either.Of course this counts for questions 3,4 and 5 as well but I mainly got requests to clarify my first statement.
or question 4, or question 5 for that matter.
To me the answer to question 2 very much conflicts with the answer to question 1.
Due to the way wordperfect and word differ in where they store the formatting information; this is stored above each paragraph in word, and at the place where it needs to be applied (like in html without a stylesheet) in wordperfect, a reveal formatting screen like the underwaterscreen is impossible in word. There was a product called crosseyes that would try to emulate this feature in word for people addicted to this thing, but it was not at all as powerful as the thing built in WP. This reveal formatting window you describe that exists in word 2003 is even less powerful than that. In the WP screen, absolutely every piece of formatting code, where it starts, stops, what text it applies to, etc. is shown and can be deleted, copied, cut and moved to different parts of the document. Here's a (small) screen shot I found with google: http://media.wiley.com/assets/194/92/0-7645-4352-0_000300.jpg/ which might illustrate it a bit.
Any slashdot article that's bitching about microsoft word needs at least one person sadly referring to the wordperfect reveal codes option they so miss. I didn't see it being referred to yet so here I am, karma in hand. (Knowing it's off topic and all) I guess I'll finally bow down to the masses, this will be my last cry for the good old days of the reveal codes screen. The alt-F3, the underwaterscreen as we used to call it... whether due to mass ignorance, evil microsoft package deals, or maybe we reveal codes lovers were just the weird ones, and the word meta-information handling won due to it's actual superiority. I don't know, but it's absolutely too late now, and I need to let it go. But why why why does openoffice emulate that Word crap to the extent that when using that suite you run into the exact same horrible formatting issues! Press backspace, and suddenly the whole text document is bold. You can't get that picture to move down one line, unless you want the formatting of 2 paragraphs to turn into a complete mess, and blank pages added. Why why why? I want my underwaterscreen! Please god give me the strength to let this go and not long for something archaic and so much better than everything the rest of the world uses for some weird reason. I mean, there even was a time when word perfect 8 was available on linux! where did that time go?! Ok that was it, I promise I'll never rant about that again. I hope I can do this.
From 4.21% to 7.31% is an increase of ~73% of market share for the mac.
From 0.29% to 0.63% is an increase of ~117% of market share for linux.
Isn't that a bigger victory for linux?
The relative market share increase of linux being about 1.5 times that of the mac...
... no wireless broadcasting at allI'm not sure if your post is serious as these questions have been answered many times in slashdot. Hiding your ESSID, not using DHCP and using MAC address filtering are insufficient in adding security as they are all part of any exchange between the router and wireless connections. The MAC address of existing machines can be found and copied in seconds. The ESSID and IP address can be found very easily as well. Hacking WEP encryption is also trivial. As a security measure, all these are completely pointless, and do not add anything in terms of security. Hiding your ESSID does decrease your wireless performance. The only security measure that has any real effect in protecting your wireless network from people who really want to get in is using secure encryption. (WPA, etc.)
Did we switch to one while I was asleep?
I guess this means Duke Nukem Forever will be coming out next month.