The cheaper the detectors get, the more widespread they will become. Is that a good thing? Probably good for the detector producing industry, and for the inkjet printer producers too. But for us, human beings?
You're safer indeed, if the governments would be able to safely store all that data, and if they could guarantee that it would be used only for the protection of the citizens and not for any oppression. But those are two big ifs.
It has been shown again and again that the governments will eventually be hacked. Or some guy just loses a usb/laptop. And because we actually have functioning democracies in the Western world, you never know what kind of idiots will be in the governments tomorrow.
That's how research investments should always work. Either low risk, small reward (typically funded by industry), or high risk of failure, but aiming high with benefits for all of society (typically funded by government).
In a religion, you just tell people what is the Truth. In science, you try to observe and learn.
The models are self fulfilling prophecies.
The high priests of the Economy tell us the Truth. The lower priests spread the word. And the people believe. Without the belief of the people, the system would instantly collapse. And if reality turns out differently, then they/we just invent a New Truth.
I mean, is it really necessary to give trillions of euros/dollars to banks to bail them out? In which pockets is that money disappearing? The bailouts are presented as "The Only Way"... but nobody actually knows.
Europe has a higher population than the US... and even higher than all of North America. And almost all Europeans can afford a smart phone.
And our crisis doesn't hit the customers so much... It's a lot of noise from the banks and governments... and the Greeks seem to be on strike permanently now. But that's just 1 country out of many. I thought that it was the US, rather than Europe, where customers couldn't pay their own bills anymore, and where houses went up for sale becaus the mortgage was too much? That doesn't happen much over here.
It's weird that the financial companies can control the media in such a way.
I thought that credit card companies had some legal obligation to transfer money from A to B, unless the money was actually criminal money? But last time I checked, Assange was accused (not convicted) of rape. And the Wikileaks organization as a whole wasn't accused of anything in a legal court. Or am I missing something?
The US will fail if it continues to act on the lies of socialism, "state capitalism", and oligarchy.
LOL. Some Republicans can really twist socialism into sounding like a pointless form of charity.
Can I just point to Western Europe and Scandinavia... where tax is high, where education is practically for free (i.e. working people pay for the students to study, and live, and party, and even take a holiday). You should come and visit us socialists here... You'd be surprised - it actually works.
The US is not at all socialist. If you do it, do it right. The US just subsidizes big corporations... I think the US should go either to the real capitalist way (but then be serious about it, and drop all support), or be more socialist. But the current situation is useless.
A little device to burst the balloon on command, how difficult can that be?
It seems to me that if you want your gear back, you'd better make sure you know in which continent it will land. From TFA:
The balloon surely burst at this point, so it could have landed anywhere from Poland to Ukraine to Russia.
If I read between the lines, they aren't even 100% sure it actually burst over Eastern Europe. It might as well be somewhere in Siberia or China. Or the Pacific.
And it looks like a styrofoam box, and the alphabet used on it is not the cyrillic one, or Chinese, so a lot of people in the path of that balloon might not understand it. In addition, it looks like a piece of packaging material. Good luck finding it back.
Different market, lower prices
on
The Case For Piracy
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
My parents had maybe 100-200 albums, and paid a certain percentage of their income for music. I have 1000-2000 albums, but I certainly am not going to pay 10 times as much as my parents (if only because logically I listen to them 10 times less on average, and because I have only some Mb of harddisk space, rather than a fancy disk in a nice cover on a real shelf).
The music industry just have to get to grips that prices have to drop dramatically for people to stop downloading. I cannot afford to buy music now.
I can see this having many cool applications (if only because it has a very good built in camera system, and a projector).
But I cannot see myself on a train, working for an hour literally on the back of my hand. I would probably still want a flat, white, sturdy surface to work on. And... isn't a keyboard + mouse a million times cheaper than a projector + motion detection?
I have some confidence that this test will actually be used to improve services to customers. For example, the EU over the last couple of years has come down hard on the telecom industry, forcing them simply to become cheaper and to improve services.
It seems that although the EU takes 1984 as a guidebook rather than an example, they at least realize that its citizens must have an affordable and good quality information infrastructure if they want anything to eavesdrop on:-)
The whole point of the EU is to keep the leaders on speaking terms, no matter what happens and no matter how great the disagreement.
Although the U in EU suggests we're a union, we actually are not. Although Brussels thinks it has a lot of power, and constantly tries to get more power, the reality is that any country can do whatever they want at any time.
Why would off-shoring increase the risk? It would perhaps be of importance if the risk is related to the secrecy around the development. But if you make your code safe by secrecy, then it is not safe anyway, whether you develop it on-shope or anywhere else in the world. You should always assume that secrets are leaked... Always.
Yup. I agree. But there are costs for the Stanford lessons too... and they too are absorbed by someone else (US govt.? California? The other students who pay the tuition fees?).
Teaching certainly didn't become more efficient overnight. For proper education, students will still require individual attention from skilled teachers. Students will have to make tests, some of which are not multiple choice and must be corrected again by teachers. In short: education costs money.
Correction: In many parts of the world, the costs associated with university level educations provided to students are subsidized by those who are not attending university.
I think it sounds more positive to say that education is paid by those who have already received it. But what you wrote is not wrong.
In many parts of the world, university level education has been for free for several decades. And if it isn't free, then it is at least heavily state-sponsored and students receive funds from the governments to pay the tuition, and sometimes even their living costs entirely.
Of course, it's fun to be able to follow a Stanford course and learn of some differences. Of course, Stanford is a renowned institute, and possibly one of the best in the world.
But the high tuition fees in the USA are the exception rather than the rule, and free education is nothing new.
I think it shows the problem: The measurement was pure data. The error was an estimate. And everything else that happens to the data is an opinion.
Politicians should just understand the process between the measurement and the of writing the report they're reading. They don't need to know the details, but they should know that there are errors, assumptions, and opinions that influenced the numbers they read.
Scientists produce data. But this data already has some uncertainty (which is often not reported, btw). This data is then interpreted, manipulated and possibly even extrapolated, which might introduce additional errors. Then extra assumptions are made to arrive at an answer to a question from a politician.
Can you still call that a fact? I think politicians should merely aim to understand this process.
Slashdot Mirror
The cheaper the detectors get, the more widespread they will become. Is that a good thing? Probably good for the detector producing industry, and for the inkjet printer producers too. But for us, human beings?
You're safer indeed, if the governments would be able to safely store all that data, and if they could guarantee that it would be used only for the protection of the citizens and not for any oppression. But those are two big ifs.
It has been shown again and again that the governments will eventually be hacked. Or some guy just loses a usb/laptop.
And because we actually have functioning democracies in the Western world, you never know what kind of idiots will be in the governments tomorrow.
Pity really that some idiots actually feel safer when they are constantly monitored.
... is a neutrino.
Oblig and not even so related xkcd: http://xkcd.com/282/
That's how research investments should always work.
Either low risk, small reward (typically funded by industry), or high risk of failure, but aiming high with benefits for all of society (typically funded by government).
In a religion, you just tell people what is the Truth. In science, you try to observe and learn.
The models are self fulfilling prophecies.
The high priests of the Economy tell us the Truth. The lower priests spread the word. And the people believe. Without the belief of the people, the system would instantly collapse. And if reality turns out differently, then they/we just invent a New Truth.
I mean, is it really necessary to give trillions of euros/dollars to banks to bail them out? In which pockets is that money disappearing? The bailouts are presented as "The Only Way"... but nobody actually knows.
Europe has a higher population than the US... and even higher than all of North America. And almost all Europeans can afford a smart phone.
And our crisis doesn't hit the customers so much... It's a lot of noise from the banks and governments... and the Greeks seem to be on strike permanently now. But that's just 1 country out of many. I thought that it was the US, rather than Europe, where customers couldn't pay their own bills anymore, and where houses went up for sale becaus the mortgage was too much? That doesn't happen much over here.
Wikipedia to the rescue!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures
$3.5 million is a lot of money if you live in your mom's basement and pay no rent.
It's weird that the financial companies can control the media in such a way.
I thought that credit card companies had some legal obligation to transfer money from A to B, unless the money was actually criminal money? But last time I checked, Assange was accused (not convicted) of rape. And the Wikileaks organization as a whole wasn't accused of anything in a legal court. Or am I missing something?
The US will fail if it continues to act on the lies of socialism, "state capitalism", and oligarchy.
LOL. Some Republicans can really twist socialism into sounding like a pointless form of charity.
Can I just point to Western Europe and Scandinavia... where tax is high, where education is practically for free (i.e. working people pay for the students to study, and live, and party, and even take a holiday). You should come and visit us socialists here... You'd be surprised - it actually works.
The US is not at all socialist. If you do it, do it right. The US just subsidizes big corporations... I think the US should go either to the real capitalist way (but then be serious about it, and drop all support), or be more socialist. But the current situation is useless.
A little device to burst the balloon on command, how difficult can that be?
It seems to me that if you want your gear back, you'd better make sure you know in which continent it will land.
From TFA:
The balloon surely burst at this point, so it could have landed anywhere from Poland to Ukraine to Russia.
If I read between the lines, they aren't even 100% sure it actually burst over Eastern Europe. It might as well be somewhere in Siberia or China. Or the Pacific.
And it looks like a styrofoam box, and the alphabet used on it is not the cyrillic one, or Chinese, so a lot of people in the path of that balloon might not understand it. In addition, it looks like a piece of packaging material. Good luck finding it back.
My parents had maybe 100-200 albums, and paid a certain percentage of their income for music.
I have 1000-2000 albums, but I certainly am not going to pay 10 times as much as my parents (if only because logically I listen to them 10 times less on average, and because I have only some Mb of harddisk space, rather than a fancy disk in a nice cover on a real shelf).
The music industry just have to get to grips that prices have to drop dramatically for people to stop downloading. I cannot afford to buy music now.
I can see this having many cool applications (if only because it has a very good built in camera system, and a projector).
But I cannot see myself on a train, working for an hour literally on the back of my hand. I would probably still want a flat, white, sturdy surface to work on.
And... isn't a keyboard + mouse a million times cheaper than a projector + motion detection?
The news will start with "I remember when... ".
The good old days will be 140 years ago, instead of just 60. Btw, people were much friendlier in the good old days, and also worked a lot harder.
Sherry sales will explode, and sherry will outsell beer.
Helping grannies cross the street becomes a full-time job.
My robot discovered alien life, but all I got was this lousy t-shirt.
Governments have tried that since the 15th-16th century, and failed every time.
I have some confidence that this test will actually be used to improve services to customers. For example, the EU over the last couple of years has come down hard on the telecom industry, forcing them simply to become cheaper and to improve services.
It seems that although the EU takes 1984 as a guidebook rather than an example, they at least realize that its citizens must have an affordable and good quality information infrastructure if they want anything to eavesdrop on :-)
The whole point of the EU is to keep the leaders on speaking terms, no matter what happens and no matter how great the disagreement.
Although the U in EU suggests we're a union, we actually are not. Although Brussels thinks it has a lot of power, and constantly tries to get more power, the reality is that any country can do whatever they want at any time.
Why would off-shoring increase the risk? It would perhaps be of importance if the risk is related to the secrecy around the development. But if you make your code safe by secrecy, then it is not safe anyway, whether you develop it on-shope or anywhere else in the world. You should always assume that secrets are leaked... Always.
Yup. I agree.
But there are costs for the Stanford lessons too... and they too are absorbed by someone else (US govt.? California? The other students who pay the tuition fees?).
Teaching certainly didn't become more efficient overnight. For proper education, students will still require individual attention from skilled teachers. Students will have to make tests, some of which are not multiple choice and must be corrected again by teachers. In short: education costs money.
Correction: In many parts of the world, the costs associated with university level educations provided to students are subsidized by those who are not attending university.
I think it sounds more positive to say that education is paid by those who have already received it. But what you wrote is not wrong.
In many parts of the world, university level education has been for free for several decades. And if it isn't free, then it is at least heavily state-sponsored and students receive funds from the governments to pay the tuition, and sometimes even their living costs entirely.
Of course, it's fun to be able to follow a Stanford course and learn of some differences. Of course, Stanford is a renowned institute, and possibly one of the best in the world.
But the high tuition fees in the USA are the exception rather than the rule, and free education is nothing new.
Huh? [...]
I think it shows the problem: The measurement was pure data. The error was an estimate. And everything else that happens to the data is an opinion.
Politicians should just understand the process between the measurement and the of writing the report they're reading. They don't need to know the details, but they should know that there are errors, assumptions, and opinions that influenced the numbers they read.
Scientists produce data. But this data already has some uncertainty (which is often not reported, btw).
This data is then interpreted, manipulated and possibly even extrapolated, which might introduce additional errors.
Then extra assumptions are made to arrive at an answer to a question from a politician.
Can you still call that a fact? I think politicians should merely aim to understand this process.