And if there was a form of transportation that was functionally nigh-equivalent to air travel, your point would not be moot. But there isn't, so it is.
It's not that rare for reviewers to skim the appendix of a paper, and it doesn't necessarily go against their instructions. Appendices tend to be more useful to people who need detailed information about how the results presented in a paper were obtained (typically these are researchers in the same subfield), rather than reviewers or researchers whose work is only moderately related to the paper.
For marketing and PR, that is. Public opinion can be turned around on anything, given sufficient effort. Notice how Bradley Manning slowly went from "hero" to "creepy loser" in public forums over the years?
Malaria kills less than 1 million people a year. The annual population growth of just sub-Saharan Africa is over 20 million. Malaria is a drop in the bucket of population growth. Not only is it inhumanly cruel to even suggest it as a form of population control, it is also really stupid because it is common knowledge that fertility rates are inversely related to child mortality, and that population growth is inversely related to QoL (dying children tend to get in the way of education, economic growth, etc). Every time any article related to saving lives in poor regions comes up, someone always repeats this stupid and racist sorry excuse for logic. If you want a circlejerk about how much better life would be if we just killed all those smelly brown people that utilize a TINY fraction of the resources your "developed" ass does, you might have more fun over at 4chan.
That's why you need a game-theoretic, adversarial model instead of a simple statistical model based on past observations. Regret minimization, multi-arm bandits, etc.
So because it doesn't offer a benefit to you, it can't be of benefit to 99% of computer users who don't go through nearly as much data as you do daily?
And so the economic decline of America continues. Just business as usual. Now we are here discussing eating insects because meat is too expensive
That's a bit disingenuous. There are serious sustainability and scalability issues with the usual livestock. It would be more accurate to say that this is not business as usual, because "business as usual" was when Western Europe and the US had a global monopoly on the good life.
All that gets you is N2 gas in a can. To be biologically useful, nitrogen needs to be trapped as part of a range of molecules. That involves breaking the N2 bond, which takes a lot of energy. While it can be facilitated with come catalysts, to my knowledge the family of microbes in question are much better at doing it than any existing industrial process.
So much easier, in fact, that trapping N2 from the atmosphere into usable molecules is ridiculously expensive (the N2 bond is so strong that nitrogen almost always acts like a noble gas, i.e. completely chemically inert).
You didn't even glance at the article, did you? Points 2 and 3 are made and partially addressed. As for using linear accelerators, if you're proposing building a railgun on the side of a cliff, then go give it a shot; but your assertion that it is much easier seems too strong to state without justification.
One of these days someone should build a car with a bunch of cameras around it and an oculus rift inside with a 360 view so you feel like you're in wonderwoman's jet.
You buy a gun, and threaten random people in the street to give you their stuff until you're caught. You break into people's homes while they're at work and steal their TVs until you're caught. What's your point?
There are good ways of telling when a building is about to fall down, and there are good ways of fixing buildings so they don't fall down for a long time. Neither of those are true for earthquakes. Also buildings don't increase in potential energy over time, faults do.
Have you considered getting a job with the Secret Service? You managed to uncover a conspiracy that they missed when performing their background check on Huma Abedin, despite no doubt having far more resources than you do. Your intelligence and intuition are stunning. You owe it to this country to use your talents to protect our safety and security!!
Unless you happen to be trying to change those laws, which themselves make such attempts illegal. In that case, complying with said laws is exactly the opposite of what you should to. Well, I guess complying would be fine if you plan on failing...
Ah, so you were making a statement about the laws of a nation whose leadership is being accused of tyranny.
Some countries have laws that require you to be put to dead for touching a person of the opposite sex you're not married to, you know.
Where, exactly, is that written? In the bible? In the Superman comics? In some secret Bill of Rights that God has tattooed on your ass? Where are you getting all of these Rights people do and don't have?
Slashdot Mirror
And if there was a form of transportation that was functionally nigh-equivalent to air travel, your point would not be moot. But there isn't, so it is.
Your daily dose of pedantry brought to you by drinkypoo.
Agreed, editors really should have read every word of what they were publishing.
It's not that rare for reviewers to skim the appendix of a paper, and it doesn't necessarily go against their instructions. Appendices tend to be more useful to people who need detailed information about how the results presented in a paper were obtained (typically these are researchers in the same subfield), rather than reviewers or researchers whose work is only moderately related to the paper.
For marketing and PR, that is. Public opinion can be turned around on anything, given sufficient effort. Notice how Bradley Manning slowly went from "hero" to "creepy loser" in public forums over the years?
Malaria kills less than 1 million people a year. The annual population growth of just sub-Saharan Africa is over 20 million. Malaria is a drop in the bucket of population growth. Not only is it inhumanly cruel to even suggest it as a form of population control, it is also really stupid because it is common knowledge that fertility rates are inversely related to child mortality, and that population growth is inversely related to QoL (dying children tend to get in the way of education, economic growth, etc). Every time any article related to saving lives in poor regions comes up, someone always repeats this stupid and racist sorry excuse for logic. If you want a circlejerk about how much better life would be if we just killed all those smelly brown people that utilize a TINY fraction of the resources your "developed" ass does, you might have more fun over at 4chan.
That's why you need a game-theoretic, adversarial model instead of a simple statistical model based on past observations. Regret minimization, multi-arm bandits, etc.
So because it doesn't offer a benefit to you, it can't be of benefit to 99% of computer users who don't go through nearly as much data as you do daily?
But wearing a big douchy snorkel like douchy headset is the douchy reason why douchy VR has never taken off in the douchy years ...
There, hope that helps. What the fuck is up with the rampant, vicious technophobia on slashdot?
And so the economic decline of America continues. Just business as usual. Now we are here discussing eating insects because meat is too expensive
That's a bit disingenuous. There are serious sustainability and scalability issues with the usual livestock. It would be more accurate to say that this is not business as usual, because "business as usual" was when Western Europe and the US had a global monopoly on the good life.
All that gets you is N2 gas in a can. To be biologically useful, nitrogen needs to be trapped as part of a range of molecules. That involves breaking the N2 bond, which takes a lot of energy. While it can be facilitated with come catalysts, to my knowledge the family of microbes in question are much better at doing it than any existing industrial process.
So much easier, in fact, that trapping N2 from the atmosphere into usable molecules is ridiculously expensive (the N2 bond is so strong that nitrogen almost always acts like a noble gas, i.e. completely chemically inert).
You didn't even glance at the article, did you? Points 2 and 3 are made and partially addressed. As for using linear accelerators, if you're proposing building a railgun on the side of a cliff, then go give it a shot; but your assertion that it is much easier seems too strong to state without justification.
One of these days someone should build a car with a bunch of cameras around it and an oculus rift inside with a 360 view so you feel like you're in wonderwoman's jet.
You buy a gun, and threaten random people in the street to give you their stuff until you're caught. You break into people's homes while they're at work and steal their TVs until you're caught. What's your point?
There are good ways of telling when a building is about to fall down, and there are good ways of fixing buildings so they don't fall down for a long time. Neither of those are true for earthquakes. Also buildings don't increase in potential energy over time, faults do.
+1 most inane comment of the day
So that's where the three heads in Spirited Away come from!
Wow, literally every sentence you wrote is wrong, illogical, and/or inconsistent. Amazing. I couldn't have pulled that off if I tried.
Have you considered getting a job with the Secret Service? You managed to uncover a conspiracy that they missed when performing their background check on Huma Abedin, despite no doubt having far more resources than you do. Your intelligence and intuition are stunning. You owe it to this country to use your talents to protect our safety and security!!
Unless you happen to be trying to change those laws, which themselves make such attempts illegal. In that case, complying with said laws is exactly the opposite of what you should to. Well, I guess complying would be fine if you plan on failing...
Ah, so you were making a statement about the laws of a nation whose leadership is being accused of tyranny. Some countries have laws that require you to be put to dead for touching a person of the opposite sex you're not married to, you know.
Where, exactly, is that written? In the bible? In the Superman comics? In some secret Bill of Rights that God has tattooed on your ass? Where are you getting all of these Rights people do and don't have?
cough cough Iraq cough
I agree. I'm afraid I found myself playing devil's advocate for a position I'm not partial to.