The generalizing to multiple variables is actually not as trivial as it seems, especially if you want to continue to general manifolds, rather than just R^n.
There is actually quite a bit in generalizing from 1 to 2 that is not trivially obvious. Going from 2 to 3, on the other hand is fairly trivial.
Statistics without a good course on probability can't get beyond the cookbook stage, and really applying it needs to do that in many cases. Statistics is very useful methodology for compactly summarizing frequency and probability distributions.
Of course, good probability courses are quite rare. Probabilities are not merely long-term frequencies, borel sigma algebras provide no insight, etc, etc. Reading E.T. Jaynes' book _Probability Theory: the Logic of Science_ is a great introduction. Just ignore anything he says about quantum mechanics.
Of course, people really should learn both probability and calculus before they even get to college, but expecting that might be a bit much.
Copyright covers, both actual distribution, *and* mere copying. See section 106, clauses (1), (3), and possibly (5).
This is how some BIOS reverse engineers were successfully sued -- when the computer copied the BIOS from the ROM into RAM to execute faster, this was ruled a copyright violation even though this is exactly how it was designed to be used.
Fortunately, this was mostly fixed with section 117, but this only applies to computer programs, though section 112 covers some (but not all) similar issues for other types of works.
If section 108 were slightly altered, it could provide an exception that might arguably apply. This allows archives and libraries to make copies in certain circumstances, but it doesn't apply if they get *any* commercial benefit, direct or indirect. If they provided this service even with no ads, they still would presumably get good will from this...
Basically, yes, Google is violating the copyrights, when they scan the books in. This is a copyright violation.
This is not, however, what is upsetting the the authors and book publishers. What upsets them is that google is allowing other people to search, which is fairly clearly fair use, given how much is displayed. They want a cut of the money stream, of any possible monetization of their works, even though that is not what copyright entitles them to.
(Counting this as a copyright violation is going to be horrendous once we have AI...)
Making it concave would not be enough for stability. You can make it semi-stable via the same way they make magnetic traps semi-stable (essentially quickly flopping which way is stable and which unstable), but true stability requires active control.
> You only cancel constant background noise, so you're > canceling based on feedback from sound heard earlier. That's how the headphones > work too.
Actually, it isn't. You can cancel one-tone that way unless you constantly do a windowed FFT.
> (You don't think they have instantanious electronics do you? Even anlog signals > have latency.)
Not instananeous, but orders of magnitude faster than digital. Most do in fact just invert the signal. Headphones make the sound directional enough so that it can work.
> The real problem comes with phase alignment, which will only be possible at > certain points, not everywhere.
Correct. With enough speakers and microphones it might be possible over fairly broad areas, but the variable latencies kill you.
It has been shown throughout history that a weaker force can win and overthrow a dominating military power, if they have outside aid. For the U.S., it was largely French aid.
Look, it's not surprising that you can find a on old variant spelling of shoo out there. But it's not correct modern spelling. When I see "shew", I think of the old spelling of show, rather than shoo.
He first tried writing it in C++ (which he knew better than Haskell at the time). He couldn't get it to work. Correctness trumps performance.
It is absolutely correct that it has problems with trees the size of the Linux Kernel, but it works great for anything reasonably sized, and the issues are being worked on.
Not as capable? In what sense? Can you posit a mechanism that would cause this? I'd think just the opposite -- a more youthful body with less wear and tear should be able to handle toxins, such as alcohol better (apart from size issues, which don't make a huge difference between 18 and 25, though some).
It seems to me that a large part of being able to handle alcohol is having practice handling alcohol. Teenagers should be drinking under the supervision of their parents before they go off to college and get wasted every night.
Yes, young drivers and alcohol don't mix. So maybe driving should go up to 21, and alcohol use gets brought down to 16. (Okay, okay, this utterly fails in rural areas...)
Why? Because it hadn't been done right until possibly BitKeeper. Even with BitKeeper as background though, Darcs has a nice consistent theory behind how it manipulates patches that is truly innovative.
Re:IASNAL
on
Beyond Pay?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You can't tape them saying that stuff (since it breaks wiretapping laws, I believe)
Depends on the state. The sane ones allow taping so long as at least one person in the conversation (i.e. you) consent. Others do not.
See Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
A kilosecond is roughly a quarter hour. 4 kilo seconds is almost 67 minutes. 100 kiloseconds is close to a day, at almost 28 hours. (all assuming kilo=10^3, not 2^10)
Slashdot Mirror
The generalizing to multiple variables is actually not as trivial as it seems, especially if you want to continue to general manifolds, rather than just R^n.
There is actually quite a bit in generalizing from 1 to 2 that is not trivially obvious. Going from 2 to 3, on the other hand is fairly trivial.
Statistics without a good course on probability can't get beyond the cookbook stage, and really applying it needs to do that in many cases.
Statistics is very useful methodology for compactly summarizing frequency and probability distributions.
Of course, good probability courses are quite rare. Probabilities are not merely long-term frequencies, borel sigma algebras provide no insight, etc, etc. Reading E.T. Jaynes' book _Probability Theory: the Logic of Science_ is a great introduction. Just ignore anything he says about quantum mechanics.
Of course, people really should learn both probability and calculus before they even get to college, but expecting that might be a bit much.
> discreet mathematics.
Yes, much nicer than the showy, obvious, and unrestrained mathematics.
(The word you want is discrete)
As to those who question whether scanning a copy of book you own is a copyright violation, you can see for yourself how out-of-control copyright law is by visitings c_sup_01_17.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/u
Copyright covers, both actual distribution, *and* mere copying. See section 106, clauses (1), (3), and possibly (5).
This is how some BIOS reverse engineers were successfully sued -- when the computer copied the BIOS from the ROM into RAM to execute faster, this was ruled a copyright violation even though this is exactly how it was designed to be used.
Fortunately, this was mostly fixed with section 117, but this only applies to computer programs, though section 112 covers some (but not all) similar issues for other types of works.
If section 108 were slightly altered, it could provide an exception that might arguably apply. This allows archives and libraries to make copies in certain circumstances, but it doesn't apply if they get *any* commercial benefit, direct or indirect. If they provided this service even with no ads, they still would presumably get good will from this...
They're a reasonably large portion of the SF section of most of the bookstores I visit.
Basically, yes, Google is violating the copyrights, when they scan the books in. This is a copyright violation.
This is not, however, what is upsetting the the authors and book publishers. What upsets them is that google is allowing other people to search, which is fairly clearly fair use, given how much is displayed. They want a cut of the money stream, of any possible monetization of their works, even though that is not what copyright entitles them to.
(Counting this as a copyright violation is going to be horrendous once we have AI...)
Making it concave would not be enough for stability. You can make it semi-stable via the same way they make magnetic traps semi-stable (essentially quickly flopping which way is stable and which unstable), but true stability requires active control.
Now available for free as The Ur-Quan Masters, downloadable from http://sc2.sf.net/ or your distributions packages.
Hmm. In classical latin, this would be pronounced "Kick-a-robot". Is that really the message they want to send?
Ahn'Qiraj? Even people not from Alasksa should know it's spelled _Anchorage_.
Down, not across.
Read the article, two will provide .flac on request.
It was a one-armed man...
> You only cancel constant background noise, so you're
> canceling based on feedback from sound heard earlier. That's how the headphones
> work too.
Actually, it isn't. You can cancel one-tone that way unless you constantly do a
windowed FFT.
> (You don't think they have instantanious electronics do you? Even anlog signals > have latency.)
Not instananeous, but orders of magnitude faster than digital. Most do in fact just invert the signal. Headphones make the sound directional enough so that it can work.
> The real problem comes with phase alignment, which will only be possible at
> certain points, not everywhere.
Correct. With enough speakers and microphones it might be possible over fairly broad areas, but the variable latencies kill you.
It has been shown throughout history that a weaker force can win and overthrow a dominating military power, if they have outside aid. For the U.S., it was largely French aid.
No, no: it's "You know-nothing spelling-Nazi."
Look, it's not surprising that you can find a on old variant spelling of shoo out there. But it's not correct modern spelling. When I see "shew", I think of the old spelling of show, rather than shoo.
He first tried writing it in C++ (which he knew better than Haskell at the time). He couldn't get it to work. Correctness trumps performance.
It is absolutely correct that it has problems with trees the size of the Linux Kernel, but it works great for anything reasonably sized, and the issues are being worked on.
such as SRP?
Not as capable? In what sense? Can you posit a mechanism that would cause this? I'd think just
the opposite -- a more youthful body with less wear and tear should be able to handle toxins, such as alcohol better (apart from size issues, which don't make a huge difference between 18 and 25, though some).
It seems to me that a large part of being able to handle alcohol is having practice handling alcohol. Teenagers should be drinking under the supervision of their parents before they go off to college and get wasted every night.
Yes, young drivers and alcohol don't mix. So maybe driving should go up to 21, and alcohol use gets brought down to 16. (Okay, okay, this utterly fails in rural areas...)
Why? Because it hadn't been done right until possibly BitKeeper. Even with BitKeeper as background though, Darcs has a nice consistent theory behind how it manipulates patches that is truly innovative.
I always thought it mean "Little Rubber Feet".
> Why should I believe him then when he says he'll [Kerry] be tough on terrorism?
0 9.sirota.html
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/04
You mean "because it is divisible by 100, but not 400".
Math correction:
A kilosecond is roughly a quarter hour. 4 kilo seconds is almost 67 minutes. 100 kiloseconds
is close to a day, at almost 28 hours.
(all assuming kilo=10^3, not 2^10)