So obviously, unless this person can invent a virus like in "12 Monkeys" or "28 Days Later", one person simply can't do anything to make a difference.
Well, that's kind of pessimistic. One person can do only a small amount, but lots of 'one person's together can make a huge difference. In terms of changing the population, it doesn't make sense to take the very short view of one person living or dying but the overall decisions of societies on how many children to have. And that's a function of multiple factors (child death rates, cultural importance of boys vs girls, female education, contraception availability, etc.) and people can affect these factors over time. So, don't think that you can't make a difference, since you can even if it's a small one, in combination with other people it can be huge. Just look at the changes in fertility rates of multiple countries in the past 30 years; the demographics have changed drastically, and that's all because of lots of one persons doing things to make a difference.
Dude, we're supposed to be burying all our nuclear waste on the moon, and then at some point it will go critical and launch into space, and then people will get to have sex with really hot aliens. Don't mess this fantasy up for me!
(Does the fact that this is what I think of when consider the uses of the moon mean that I'm really old?)
The US Department of Energy funds a lot of stuff that is only tangentially related to 'energy'. For example, the Human Genome Project was largely funded by the DOE, because DOE is in charge of studying the effect of energy and production of energy on people, and so needs to understand people and how they work and develop. Bit of a stretch if you ask me, but I'm all for science, so I'm happy they did it. Similarly, DOE fund lots and lots of other basic science. See: http://www.energy.gov/sciencetech/index.htm. One of those things is basic research in materials. They want to know how to make really strong things (like for flywheels and reactor vessels) or light things (for windmills), or things that do not fall apart when exposed to various kinds of radiation, etc.
US DOE also runs most of the big government labs that you have heard of (Argonne, Lawrence Livermore, Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, etc.) See their page at http://www.energy.gov/organization/labs-techcenters.htm . People don't realize just how big DOE is; it's huge.
No, only ferric metals 'rust', but there the rust is oxidation along with an expansion caused by oxidation, resulting in exposing more material to oxidation. And that's why iron objects rust away. You could say that "only iron rusts but all metals oxidize", but you would still be wrong since, no, not all metals oxidize. Gold, platinum and palladium do not oxidize under normal conditions.
Further, metals like aluminum, titanium, and zinc, along with stainless steel (steel combined with chromium) do not oxidize very much at all or only oxidize in a very thin layer on the surface, protecting the metal below. So, for all practical purposes, they don't rust either.
While I agree with you, you know these people probably still pay far more taxes than I do and are certainly covering their services. These people have to subsidize the 50% of the population that legally doesn't pay taxes.
Your numbers are off, for two reasons: 1. Not paying income tax is not the same as not paying taxes, SS, Medicare, Medicade still apply. 2. Your number is too high even for income taxes Here are some real numbers: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_40_percent_of_americans_pay_no.html I welcome your updated numbers if you can find them.
Heck, I doubt my taxes cover all the services I receive and I am in the top 20% of income earners. Of course this depends on how I factor defense spending as a service.
We have way too much of our tax burden assigned to the wealthy.
We have way too little of our tax burden assigned to the wealthy. As a percentage of income, they are paying historically low rates. See the wikipedia page on income tax, look for the tax rates section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States. I'd be all for returning us to the rates of Reagan year of 1986. How does that sound? Combine the low rates with the huge shift of income to the highest percentage earners, and we have a tax code that is systematically letting the rich steal from the middle class.
That doesn't make any sense. The economic viability of many different energy sources (which in turn can be used to make plastics) occurs when oil reaches $100 / barrel. At $200 / barrel, there's lot of different sources, and at $400, almost anything will be cheaper.
I second tomshardware.com. There really is no way that a non-expert can spend the time really understanding all the different models, their differences, strengths, weaknesses, etc, so listen to (hopefully independent) people who make it their business to understand. Periodically, Toms Hardware runs a graphic card comparison called, naturally, 'Best Graphics Cards for the Money'. The latest was in November. The last page of the article has a chart of different cards and ranks them. Go with that.
Um...no. Why would you think that? Do you have any citations for this?
We know that the isotope concentration of C14 changes in the atmosphere, and we think we know why. That's why the dates are calibrated against other ways of estimation (dendrochronology, ice cores, varves, etc). We also know that C14 is not uniformly distributed because there are carbon sinks (oceans, rivers from ice melt, etc.), so that is taken into account as well. The referenced paper has no bearing on this at all, and radiocarbon dating is good to at least 20,000 years ago. So, what are you talking about?
A genetic algorithm is not an algorithm? That doesn't make sense. In fact, most processes where you are searching for a solution to a non-convex problem don't guarantee to 'solve' the problem. As for making in terminate, that's trivial: stop when the last 3 iterations did not improve by more than epsilon.
Further, even solutions to convex problems don't provide the 'answer', but rather a value close to the solution, to some measure epsilon.
That's a wonderful idea. And you should all discuss it in your seminar and back in the dorm / faculty lounge. And then not post it on twitter, which is what the original article said.
Before we all blow up, the warning was from one alum to their alma mater, and was suggesting not to post links to cables and WL on facebook, twitter, etc. because "engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government" which, honestly, is pretty reasonable. If the State Department is deciding between equally-qualified five candidates, and three have indicated they sympathize with WL, well then the choice is down to two. Just like companies looking at your pictures on facebook before hiring. It sucks but it's true - be responsible with what you say about yourself.
The problem with that assertion is that it's wrong. I'm not being paid to maintain a professional demeanor that would require me to withhold comment on Wikileaks and their activities. I've worked for many companies before and I don't break NDAs. Yet publicly commenting on public information somehow calls into question my ability to deal with confidential information? That's nonsense.
I'm trying to figure out which assertion you think is wrong. If I'm trying to decide who to hire for my business which has some trade secrets, you are one of the candidates, and I see that you have posted about people that have broken their NDAs, I'll hire one of the other people. Maybe, just maybe, I'll spend the time parsing what you said about people breaking their NDAs, but probably not. If you spoke highly of those people, praised their good sense, or the neat way that they used that information and got away with it, then I'll definitely not hire you. Why would the State Dept be different?
Now, yes. What about in 5 or 10 years? First, Google gets to put my front yard in full color for everyone to see. Now Digital Globe can post my back yard. What next? Can they track my every movement? Don't think that they won't if they can make a buck doing it.
/
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I don't want anyone tracking me (via cell phone, or car, or other method) without probable cause.
First, I agree. Losing MySQL has not been an issue for us. Partly because of the licensing on MySQL has always meant that we could not bundle it when we delivered software to customers. Firebird has been our choice and has worked great.
Unfortunately, they seem to be doing this with Grid Engine (formerly Sun Grid Engine). What was once open source is now closed, and the license has changed to a 90 day evaluation (and then pay) format.
Oracle has lots of avenues for choking off Sun open source projects, and has lots of laywers. Don't count them out to play dirty tricks. If they can just tie up OO for a couple of years, then it will die, and it would take that long to get through the legal system if they start claiming IP.
Well, that's generally true. You use a GA when you don't know the correct solution. It's just a stochastic search mechanism, and frankly one where you have to worry about a lot of the important factors, such as solution representation and fitness function. Lots of research ideas, and potential paths, but when faced with a real problem, there's usually a better tool for the job.
I can't find anything on the actual event. I did a google search, but all I see are articles talking about how it was _going_ to happen in July or August, but none that say what happened (if anything). Does anyone have a link to the result?
Not if you have kids. The amount of kid-related crap I have in my cars is not something that I would want to have to carry around. From toys and books, to bandages and an epi-pen, to barf bags (possibly related to the books earlier?), car seats (two different sizes), snacks, all their sports gear, extra batteries, folding chairs (for me to sit in while watching the sports), etc., my car is a microcosm of my home life. Of course, I have no need to actually drive, but it better be a vehicle I can suit for my needs.
Then the best thing to do would be to have an unbiased someone that has a clue to do some investigations. Do you have someone like that? Because there have been multiple investigations by multiple people into the allegations that there is fraud, and like Cuccinelli, they keep coming up empty. The people who would seem to have some sort of idea about science keep saying that it's valid. It's nutcases like Cuccinelli who keep saying that it's fraud.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, you stole that! See: http://xkcd.com/628
So obviously, unless this person can invent a virus like in "12 Monkeys" or "28 Days Later", one person simply can't do anything to make a difference.
Well, that's kind of pessimistic. One person can do only a small amount, but lots of 'one person's together can make a huge difference. In terms of changing the population, it doesn't make sense to take the very short view of one person living or dying but the overall decisions of societies on how many children to have. And that's a function of multiple factors (child death rates, cultural importance of boys vs girls, female education, contraception availability, etc.) and people can affect these factors over time. So, don't think that you can't make a difference, since you can even if it's a small one, in combination with other people it can be huge. Just look at the changes in fertility rates of multiple countries in the past 30 years; the demographics have changed drastically, and that's all because of lots of one persons doing things to make a difference.
Dude, we're supposed to be burying all our nuclear waste on the moon, and then at some point it will go critical and launch into space, and then people will get to have sex with really hot aliens. Don't mess this fantasy up for me!
(Does the fact that this is what I think of when consider the uses of the moon mean that I'm really old?)
Or you could just look at it graphically: http://xkcd.com/681
Why use the Greek name and not the Roman name? Is this standard scientific terminology? Just wondering.
The US Department of Energy funds a lot of stuff that is only tangentially related to 'energy'. For example, the Human Genome Project was largely funded by the DOE, because DOE is in charge of studying the effect of energy and production of energy on people, and so needs to understand people and how they work and develop. Bit of a stretch if you ask me, but I'm all for science, so I'm happy they did it. Similarly, DOE fund lots and lots of other basic science. See: http://www.energy.gov/sciencetech/index.htm. One of those things is basic research in materials. They want to know how to make really strong things (like for flywheels and reactor vessels) or light things (for windmills), or things that do not fall apart when exposed to various kinds of radiation, etc.
US DOE also runs most of the big government labs that you have heard of (Argonne, Lawrence Livermore, Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, etc.) See their page at http://www.energy.gov/organization/labs-techcenters.htm . People don't realize just how big DOE is; it's huge.
No, only ferric metals 'rust', but there the rust is oxidation along with an expansion caused by oxidation, resulting in exposing more material to oxidation. And that's why iron objects rust away. You could say that "only iron rusts but all metals oxidize", but you would still be wrong since, no, not all metals oxidize. Gold, platinum and palladium do not oxidize under normal conditions.
Further, metals like aluminum, titanium, and zinc, along with stainless steel (steel combined with chromium) do not oxidize very much at all or only oxidize in a very thin layer on the surface, protecting the metal below. So, for all practical purposes, they don't rust either.
While I agree with you, you know these people probably still pay far more taxes than I do and are certainly covering their services. These people have to subsidize the 50% of the population that legally doesn't pay taxes.
Your numbers are off, for two reasons: 1. Not paying income tax is not the same as not paying taxes, SS, Medicare, Medicade still apply. 2. Your number is too high even for income taxes Here are some real numbers: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_40_percent_of_americans_pay_no.html I welcome your updated numbers if you can find them.
Heck, I doubt my taxes cover all the services I receive and I am in the top 20% of income earners. Of course this depends on how I factor defense spending as a service.
We have way too much of our tax burden assigned to the wealthy.
We have way too little of our tax burden assigned to the wealthy. As a percentage of income, they are paying historically low rates. See the wikipedia page on income tax, look for the tax rates section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States. I'd be all for returning us to the rates of Reagan year of 1986. How does that sound? Combine the low rates with the huge shift of income to the highest percentage earners, and we have a tax code that is systematically letting the rich steal from the middle class.
If his first name is Aaron, then yes, he probably could. BTW, it if is you, thanks for all the help on the Palm OS developer forums!
You are seriously off topic here. (But to answer your question, google for Remote Desktop to view remotely, use Camtasia to do recording)
Well, the arrester wires are still there, and they always seemed more deadly to me.
That doesn't make any sense. The economic viability of many different energy sources (which in turn can be used to make plastics) occurs when oil reaches $100 / barrel. At $200 / barrel, there's lot of different sources, and at $400, almost anything will be cheaper.
I second tomshardware.com. There really is no way that a non-expert can spend the time really understanding all the different models, their differences, strengths, weaknesses, etc, so listen to (hopefully independent) people who make it their business to understand. Periodically, Toms Hardware runs a graphic card comparison called, naturally, 'Best Graphics Cards for the Money'. The latest was in November. The last page of the article has a chart of different cards and ranks them. Go with that.
Um...no. Why would you think that? Do you have any citations for this?
We know that the isotope concentration of C14 changes in the atmosphere, and we think we know why. That's why the dates are calibrated against other ways of estimation (dendrochronology, ice cores, varves, etc). We also know that C14 is not uniformly distributed because there are carbon sinks (oceans, rivers from ice melt, etc.), so that is taken into account as well. The referenced paper has no bearing on this at all, and radiocarbon dating is good to at least 20,000 years ago. So, what are you talking about?
A genetic algorithm is not an algorithm? That doesn't make sense. In fact, most processes where you are searching for a solution to a non-convex problem don't guarantee to 'solve' the problem. As for making in terminate, that's trivial: stop when the last 3 iterations did not improve by more than epsilon.
Further, even solutions to convex problems don't provide the 'answer', but rather a value close to the solution, to some measure epsilon.
That's a wonderful idea. And you should all discuss it in your seminar and back in the dorm / faculty lounge. And then not post it on twitter, which is what the original article said.
Before we all blow up, the warning was from one alum to their alma mater, and was suggesting not to post links to cables and WL on facebook, twitter, etc. because "engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government" which, honestly, is pretty reasonable. If the State Department is deciding between equally-qualified five candidates, and three have indicated they sympathize with WL, well then the choice is down to two. Just like companies looking at your pictures on facebook before hiring. It sucks but it's true - be responsible with what you say about yourself.
The problem with that assertion is that it's wrong. I'm not being paid to maintain a professional demeanor that would require me to withhold comment on Wikileaks and their activities. I've worked for many companies before and I don't break NDAs. Yet publicly commenting on public information somehow calls into question my ability to deal with confidential information? That's nonsense.
I'm trying to figure out which assertion you think is wrong. If I'm trying to decide who to hire for my business which has some trade secrets, you are one of the candidates, and I see that you have posted about people that have broken their NDAs, I'll hire one of the other people. Maybe, just maybe, I'll spend the time parsing what you said about people breaking their NDAs, but probably not. If you spoke highly of those people, praised their good sense, or the neat way that they used that information and got away with it, then I'll definitely not hire you. Why would the State Dept be different?
Now, yes. What about in 5 or 10 years? First, Google gets to put my front yard in full color for everyone to see. Now Digital Globe can post my back yard. What next? Can they track my every movement? Don't think that they won't if they can make a buck doing it.
/
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I don't want anyone tracking me (via cell phone, or car, or other method) without probable cause.
First, I agree. Losing MySQL has not been an issue for us. Partly because of the licensing on MySQL has always meant that we could not bundle it when we delivered software to customers. Firebird has been our choice and has worked great.
Second, what's SUOMI?
Unfortunately, they seem to be doing this with Grid Engine (formerly Sun Grid Engine). What was once open source is now closed, and the license has changed to a 90 day evaluation (and then pay) format.
Oracle has lots of avenues for choking off Sun open source projects, and has lots of laywers. Don't count them out to play dirty tricks. If they can just tie up OO for a couple of years, then it will die, and it would take that long to get through the legal system if they start claiming IP.
Well, that's generally true. You use a GA when you don't know the correct solution. It's just a stochastic search mechanism, and frankly one where you have to worry about a lot of the important factors, such as solution representation and fitness function. Lots of research ideas, and potential paths, but when faced with a real problem, there's usually a better tool for the job.
I can't find anything on the actual event. I did a google search, but all I see are articles talking about how it was _going_ to happen in July or August, but none that say what happened (if anything). Does anyone have a link to the result?
Not if you have kids. The amount of kid-related crap I have in my cars is not something that I would want to have to carry around. From toys and books, to bandages and an epi-pen, to barf bags (possibly related to the books earlier?), car seats (two different sizes), snacks, all their sports gear, extra batteries, folding chairs (for me to sit in while watching the sports), etc., my car is a microcosm of my home life. Of course, I have no need to actually drive, but it better be a vehicle I can suit for my needs.
oh, you mean the ones that don't indicate manipulation
Then the best thing to do would be to have an unbiased someone that has a clue to do some investigations. Do you have someone like that? Because there have been multiple investigations by multiple people into the allegations that there is fraud, and like Cuccinelli, they keep coming up empty. The people who would seem to have some sort of idea about science keep saying that it's valid. It's nutcases like Cuccinelli who keep saying that it's fraud.