I was just informed tonight that a book I worked on as the science consultant, one a Harvard astrophysicist has prepublication reviewed and deemed as having "impeccable science" is going to publication.
The book?
Poetry. About the making of "The Bomb."
Look mom, top of the world. I'm an "acknowledgement."
There are two things I find interesting about the whole thing. The first being that the poet was perspicacious enough to understand that he couldn't just "wing" the science and claim "poetic license." He knew he was writing about deep juju that he didn't understand and that he'd damned well better make sure he got the juju right. Most poets are fools. This one isn't. Even poetry needs to get it right.
The second thing is where I, personally, come into the picture. The poet was a college English professor with access to the whole of the college's science department, but. ..he couldn't understand a word the physicists there spoke to him. He needed a physicist who could speak physics in English; and better yet, could do so from the perspective of and in the language of a poet. Not to mention help him understand the culture of physicists and the Manhatten Project, since as a poet it was the people and the culture that was of particular interest to him. This requires someone who can step out and view their own field as an outsider. A "Man From Mars."
We met in a coffeehouse.
So, it isn't enough to simply know your science. You have to also know how to convey the concepts to the foolish script writers in a manner that fools can understand and get it right. This would appear to be an unusual skill, but I believe one absolutely essential for all scientists to cultivate, because the populace at large is dependent upon us to explain these things to them; and if we don't do a good job we get nonsense like state legislatures introducing bills to make pi equal to 3, which carries far greater consequences them some stupid movie doing something stupid.
And I'm really rather flattered by the review, as it reflects the quality of my work on the book.
Do you think companies like ATI have the same people working on a card design with 512MB of ram, and on coding drivers?
No, although they'd better be working in tandem.
These things work in parallel, they could be producing a new board design every day and still have the driver team working on the drivers for the same amount of time.
"Could" is something very different from "do." You have left one vital parameter out of your equation:
The budget.
They only have as many people working on a given task as managment has arranged to pay for and assigned to the duty. And the driver division is often viewed as operating at a loss because there are different people working on it, who do not produce anything that visibly brings in money, like the hardware does.
You should sit in on a budget meeting of company that's going to hell. It can be very instructive.
Besides that, ATI has put a lot of focus on their driver design over the last couple of years. . .
Because they didn't for some years before that and tarnished their reputation. That's a critical point.
. ..like the GP, who probably had a bad experience some number of years ago and has never bothered to reconsider his opinion.
Exactly. They pissed of an actual customer, who they had already spent hundreds of dollars in acquiring. He's gone away now. He's not coming back. All over a sloppy driver that shouldn't have been, and needn't have been (see your own argument) sloppy. Lost customers always hurt a company more than customers never obtained in the first place.
Especially when you factor in the rule of 200. That is that every person has direct, personal influence over the buying decisions of about 200 other people. And that rule was formulated in the preinternet days.
Here's the deal. You don't show up on the spreadsheets, so you "don't exist" to them.
A sale is quantifiable on the sheet. A lost sale is an abstract concept that requires human intelligence to comprehend and take into account.
So time and money "wasted" on coding drivers looks like a pure expense with no payback to the bean counters who think the computer has all the answers.
This is the sort of shit that happens when you abrogate your rightful place as the thinking componant of the system to a slice of rock.
I don't mean to imply that the bean counters are dumber than rocks, mind you. I mean to state it flat out.
"Don't be silly man. Why, this revolver only has one bullet in it, and I've pulled the trigger four times already without getting shot. It's perfectly safe."
"Hobbies and Interests: . . . finding new ways of doing things; breaking the rules;. .."
"I'm really fascinated about the nature of the online experience. Between 1993 and 1995 I wrote a monthly column, "Thinking About Online Communications," for the GEnie information service. This column explores the nature of online communications, with a special emphasis on the psychological and social aspects of online communications."
I can't determine if there really is such a prize, or if this thing is one big joke. ..
" There is no article, no such thing as a Nobel "Piece" Prize . .."
Of course there isn't. It's the NoblePiece Prize.
As in "really great bit of work." Noble Piece. Get it?
And of course it exists, it's just been announced right here on Slashdot. With winners and everything. Yeah, Phil Shapiro made it up, but, that's how awards come to be you know. Someone just makes them up and starts handing them out.
They don't come down from the mountain engraved on stone by the hand of God or something. Someone, like maybe Alfred Nobel, just decides to give 'em out.
I have made up and awarded a number of prizes in my day mayself. They're perfectly legitimate prizes. Like the "Best Drive of the Day" trophy at my local kart track.
I'm off to make up some prizes to award to random people.
Exactly! Just like Nobel and Pulitzer did. Although awarding them at random takes some of the value out of them. I suggest you develop some real criteria first. Then they'll really mean something.
Indeed, I'm a bit shocked by that. I usually take weeks to make a purchase. I like to ruminate a lot (do I need four stomachs to do that?). If nothing else if I still want it weeks later than I know I really want it.
I take active measures to avoid making an impulse purchase that I might later regret. Obvious impusle buy stimuli as presented by the average seller simply serves to repel me. Internet shopping is a Godsend for people like me. Think as long as I want, do my research, then still place my purchase "instantly" when I make my final decision.
People like me don't mind waiting the extra couple of days to actually receive it either, and some guy brings it right to my basement window (the piano was a tight fit, but we managed) so I never even have to brave that big, ball of fire thingy hanging up in the sky. I didn't order that.
Don't worry, the AC who corrected you got it wrong as well, not realizing that the post you responded to was a rather funny joke as well (and apparently neither did the moderators).
Pentateuch is not the correct name for a series of five books, unless they are the Holy Scripture of God.
The age of consent in Thailand is 15, higher than it is in either Canada (14) or Mexico (12).
I'm not sure you entirely grasp the concept of age of consent either. It is the age at which a person is deemed to be legally competent to make the ethical and moral questions involved for themselves.
It's really no different from legal competence to sign a contract. Age difference has no real bearing on the matter. Just "of age." Your own feelings about age difference are your own issue, not the legally consenting partner's (although I live in a state with a "multilayered" system, the laws and reasoning behind them are a bit complex; and I'm not going to go into them here).
Actually, the age of consent in England, Scotland and Wales is 16, as it is in most American states.
Doesn't really matter though, because I understand the actual question you are asking, and the answer is. ..
Currently a rather murky kettle of legal fish due to some very recent laws. Sex offenders are the new witches; and we're out to get 'em even it means violating all sorts of long held and perfectly sound legal principles to do it. Not to mention broadening the whole scope of what is defined as a sex offense so that we can simply sweep in the maximum number of people who behave sexually in a manner that offends anybody.
Sex. We're agin it.
As phrased. . ..probably not, but you might well have to face prosecution to get the definitive answer. There are whole classes of sexually related crimes now where it's impossible to tell a priori whether you are guilty of them or not. You do it, then a jury decides whether what you did was a crime or not. It all comes down to your moral judgement at the time vs. theirs after the fact. Intent doesn't even come into it.
Obscenity laws are the most obvious example.
Change the phrasing of your question just a little bit though and you could well be deep in the shit.
It was explained the only way out would have been to have her and her legal guardian (daddy) sign an agreement for sexual encounter.
In my state even this is not a way out. Children are wards of the state. Parental permission cannot be used as an exuse for "abuse" and the scenario you paint is legally abuse. Black and white. Period.
Athough at 17, as in most states, she would be perfectly legal. Most people confuse the age of consent with the age of majority. They are seperate legal issues which may coincide, but they usually don't.
Slashdot Mirror
I was just informed tonight that a book I worked on as the science consultant, one a Harvard astrophysicist has prepublication reviewed and deemed as having "impeccable science" is going to publication.
.he couldn't understand a word the physicists there spoke to him. He needed a physicist who could speak physics in English; and better yet, could do so from the perspective of and in the language of a poet. Not to mention help him understand the culture of physicists and the Manhatten Project, since as a poet it was the people and the culture that was of particular interest to him. This requires someone who can step out and view their own field as an outsider. A "Man From Mars."
The book?
Poetry. About the making of "The Bomb."
Look mom, top of the world. I'm an "acknowledgement."
There are two things I find interesting about the whole thing. The first being that the poet was perspicacious enough to understand that he couldn't just "wing" the science and claim "poetic license." He knew he was writing about deep juju that he didn't understand and that he'd damned well better make sure he got the juju right. Most poets are fools. This one isn't. Even poetry needs to get it right.
The second thing is where I, personally, come into the picture. The poet was a college English professor with access to the whole of the college's science department, but. .
We met in a coffeehouse.
So, it isn't enough to simply know your science. You have to also know how to convey the concepts to the foolish script writers in a manner that fools can understand and get it right. This would appear to be an unusual skill, but I believe one absolutely essential for all scientists to cultivate, because the populace at large is dependent upon us to explain these things to them; and if we don't do a good job we get nonsense like state legislatures introducing bills to make pi equal to 3, which carries far greater consequences them some stupid movie doing something stupid.
And I'm really rather flattered by the review, as it reflects the quality of my work on the book.
KFG
Do you think companies like ATI have the same people working on a card design with 512MB of ram, and on coding drivers?
.like the GP, who probably had a bad experience some number of years ago and has never bothered to reconsider his opinion.
No, although they'd better be working in tandem.
These things work in parallel, they could be producing a new board design every day and still have the driver team working on the drivers for the same amount of time.
"Could" is something very different from "do." You have left one vital parameter out of your equation:
The budget.
They only have as many people working on a given task as managment has arranged to pay for and assigned to the duty. And the driver division is often viewed as operating at a loss because there are different people working on it, who do not produce anything that visibly brings in money, like the hardware does.
You should sit in on a budget meeting of company that's going to hell. It can be very instructive.
Besides that, ATI has put a lot of focus on their driver design over the last couple of years. . .
Because they didn't for some years before that and tarnished their reputation. That's a critical point.
. .
Exactly. They pissed of an actual customer, who they had already spent hundreds of dollars in acquiring. He's gone away now. He's not coming back. All over a sloppy driver that shouldn't have been, and needn't have been (see your own argument) sloppy. Lost customers always hurt a company more than customers never obtained in the first place.
Especially when you factor in the rule of 200. That is that every person has direct, personal influence over the buying decisions of about 200 other people. And that rule was formulated in the preinternet days.
KFG
We really need to put a stop to damned terrorists and insurgents like this.
KFG
Quite possibly because I've posted that.
KFG
Here's the deal. You don't show up on the spreadsheets, so you "don't exist" to them.
A sale is quantifiable on the sheet. A lost sale is an abstract concept that requires human intelligence to comprehend and take into account.
So time and money "wasted" on coding drivers looks like a pure expense with no payback to the bean counters who think the computer has all the answers.
This is the sort of shit that happens when you abrogate your rightful place as the thinking componant of the system to a slice of rock.
I don't mean to imply that the bean counters are dumber than rocks, mind you. I mean to state it flat out.
KFG
Real coders do not need more than 640K.
KFG
Bugger, as it turns out restore does not support my head.
KFG
. . .we've never had any data loss. . .
"Don't be silly man. Why, this revolver only has one bullet in it, and I've pulled the trigger four times already without getting shot. It's perfectly safe."
KFG
"Hobbies and Interests: . . . finding new ways of doing things; breaking the rules;. . ."
.
"I'm really fascinated about the nature of the online experience. Between 1993 and 1995 I wrote a monthly column, "Thinking About Online Communications," for the GEnie information service. This column explores the nature of online communications, with a special emphasis on the psychological and social aspects of online communications."
I can't determine if there really is such a prize, or if this thing is one big joke. .
You are a rat, in maze. Passages lead N, S and E:
KFG
" There is no article, no such thing as a Nobel "Piece" Prize . . ."
Of course there isn't. It's the Noble Piece Prize.
As in "really great bit of work." Noble Piece. Get it?
And of course it exists, it's just been announced right here on Slashdot. With winners and everything. Yeah, Phil Shapiro made it up, but, that's how awards come to be you know. Someone just makes them up and starts handing them out.
They don't come down from the mountain engraved on stone by the hand of God or something. Someone, like maybe Alfred Nobel, just decides to give 'em out.
I have made up and awarded a number of prizes in my day mayself. They're perfectly legitimate prizes. Like the "Best Drive of the Day" trophy at my local kart track.
I'm off to make up some prizes to award to random people.
Exactly! Just like Nobel and Pulitzer did. Although awarding them at random takes some of the value out of them. I suggest you develop some real criteria first. Then they'll really mean something.
You have an "Authority Thang," don't you?
KFG
. . .they're calling the winner of the Hooter's Bikini Contest these days?
KFG
No, they teach "art." It just happens, purely coincidentally, to involve a lot of tits and stuff.
KFG
I'm curious, is the RIAA aware that the universities are engaged in adult education?
KFG
19 hours is a bit of a surprise.
Indeed, I'm a bit shocked by that. I usually take weeks to make a purchase. I like to ruminate a lot (do I need four stomachs to do that?). If nothing else if I still want it weeks later than I know I really want it.
I take active measures to avoid making an impulse purchase that I might later regret. Obvious impusle buy stimuli as presented by the average seller simply serves to repel me. Internet shopping is a Godsend for people like me. Think as long as I want, do my research, then still place my purchase "instantly" when I make my final decision.
People like me don't mind waiting the extra couple of days to actually receive it either, and some guy brings it right to my basement window (the piano was a tight fit, but we managed) so I never even have to brave that big, ball of fire thingy hanging up in the sky. I didn't order that.
KFG
The Hitchhikers Guide isn't the word of God?
Don't be daft man. Or panic.
KFG
http://www.jpgmonline.com/article.asp?issn=0022-38 59;year=1983;volume=29;issue=1;spage=46;epage=8;au last=Garg
You know, and I know, tell it to them, kid.
KFG
Bite me.
KFG
Sarcasm is one of the finest cutting tools in the box of the insightful craftsman. If all you see is the joke you've missed something.
Of course simply seeing the joke puts you ahead of the field in most cases.
KFG
Spoken like... well, like a man who didn't get the joke.
Spoken like... well, like a man who didn't get the joke.
KFG
Don't worry, the AC who corrected you got it wrong as well, not realizing that the post you responded to was a rather funny joke as well (and apparently neither did the moderators).
Pentateuch is not the correct name for a series of five books, unless they are the Holy Scripture of God.
KFG
When did adding overhead become the mark of skill?
The second it became profitable to market it as such.
KFG
The age of consent in Thailand is 15, higher than it is in either Canada (14) or Mexico (12).
I'm not sure you entirely grasp the concept of age of consent either. It is the age at which a person is deemed to be legally competent to make the ethical and moral questions involved for themselves.
It's really no different from legal competence to sign a contract. Age difference has no real bearing on the matter. Just "of age." Your own feelings about age difference are your own issue, not the legally consenting partner's (although I live in a state with a "multilayered" system, the laws and reasoning behind them are a bit complex; and I'm not going to go into them here).
KFG
Actually, the age of consent in England, Scotland and Wales is 16, as it is in most American states.
.
.probably not, but you might well have to face prosecution to get the definitive answer. There are whole classes of sexually related crimes now where it's impossible to tell a priori whether you are guilty of them or not. You do it, then a jury decides whether what you did was a crime or not. It all comes down to your moral judgement at the time vs. theirs after the fact. Intent doesn't even come into it.
Doesn't really matter though, because I understand the actual question you are asking, and the answer is. .
Currently a rather murky kettle of legal fish due to some very recent laws. Sex offenders are the new witches; and we're out to get 'em even it means violating all sorts of long held and perfectly sound legal principles to do it. Not to mention broadening the whole scope of what is defined as a sex offense so that we can simply sweep in the maximum number of people who behave sexually in a manner that offends anybody.
Sex. We're agin it.
As phrased. . .
Obscenity laws are the most obvious example.
Change the phrasing of your question just a little bit though and you could well be deep in the shit.
KFG
It was explained the only way out would have been to have her and her legal guardian (daddy) sign an agreement for sexual encounter.
In my state even this is not a way out. Children are wards of the state. Parental permission cannot be used as an exuse for "abuse" and the scenario you paint is legally abuse. Black and white. Period.
Athough at 17, as in most states, she would be perfectly legal. Most people confuse the age of consent with the age of majority. They are seperate legal issues which may coincide, but they usually don't.
KFG
Program quality? Yes!
.saving them each an hour. . .
Exactly my point.
. .
For which runtime is not the only issue.
KFG