I understand and agree with what you're saying...I just think that "different ways to say something" is shallow and trivial compared to actually having new ideas. Requiring novel expression as a tool to force students to develop as writers works really well, and banning plagiarism as immoral is correct, but there is no connection between the two: learning to write a phrase that sounds only half a bad as the perfected one you found in a review does not improve your knowledge of the subject or skills at anything other than writing. Developing writing is great, but not generally the point of the assignments in question.
The thing that's always bothered me about the "analyzing information for yourself" bit is that the paper subjects are in well-studied fields, such that any analysis you might do has already been done anyway. A half-competent researcher will then find that analysis, and they are stuck with ONLY literature review as an option, because someone else already wrote down an analysis the way they were going to analyze it!
Actually, looking at the timestamps, it was some sort of timestamp/database issue...the story nominally posted at 9:26 EST, but no posts at all show up until 9:48, at which point there are quite a few. You're right that the West Coast folks were blissfully snoozing.
I love how long this post has gone without replies (25 minutes, unless there's some sort of database lag I don't see). I guess that's a damning indictment of the US telecom industry and their pricing practices...
This was basically what we did in my CS101 and 102 classes: code up a system to store student records and class grades in C++. Students are objects! Put them in a vector! Put them in a list! Make your own list container class!
(No, I am not seriously suggesting you use that software, of course...)
being in a vehicle you're not controlling yourself is uncomfortable and feels off. You don't anticipate bumps, corners etc. the same way. People will obviously have to learn to deal with this someday
I'm not sure I agree with this. Nobody learns to drive a car without having been a passenger first, so they're used to NOT controlling the vehicle before they get used to controlling it.
My experience has been similar, but my hardware (5 year old integrated-graphics laptop) is so old that most of the failures are just insufficient resources. I usually throw in something near the minimum, then up it later if I really like one of the games. I LOVED Osmos and VVVVVV. Machinarium and Samorost 2 appear to be flash games so I'm surprosed they gave you trouble.
PS, you have Cogs listed in both lists.
Well, we certainly can't disprove that the putative drivers are or are not drivers until AFTER the quantum computer exists. Therefore, any old bag of bits _could_ be functional quantum computer drivers, and we won't know until we try to use said bits as drivers. I guess one interpretation of that is that all possible bit sequences simultaneously are and are not drivers for this hypothetical hardware, and they don't become definitely-drivers or definitely-not-drivers until we "open the box" and try to use them as drivers.
I propose that the contents of this post, interpreted as ASCII text, are indeed maybe possibly quantum CPU drivers...in a Schrodinger's Cat sort of fashion. I've written plenty of code before, but this post qualifies as my first stab at a hardware driver!
I misread the headline as "Open-Source Quantum CPU Driver Published", and got very excited - quantum computing is here! - and then very confused as to how drivers could be written for hardware that doesn't exist yet.
I guess if Ada Lovelace could write a program for Babbage's Difference Engine without the hardware, maybe the open-source hardware folks could write quantum drivers.
TFS doesn't mention, and it's hardly an obvious term. From TFA:
Bufferbloat...is the result of our misguided attempt to protect streaming applications (now 80 percent of Internet packets) by putting large memory buffers in modems, routers, network cards, and applications. These cascading buffers interfere with each other and with the flow control built into TCP from the very beginning, ultimately breaking that flow control, making things far worse than they’d be if all those buffers simply didn’t exist.
We already did this to a large extent. Surely you've heard of the Komen foundation? When they're not getting in trouble for political mishaps, they fund a TON of cancer research via private donations. Similar groups exist for most first-world chronic diseases, although there isn't a lot of public-private funding of this sort for third-world infectious diseases (that I'm aware of).
Re:Headless humans still run around too...
on
When Are You Dead?
·
· Score: 2
Unfortunately, if you already had it turned off, (as I apparently did), the "instructions" instead show you how to turn it _on_ rather than _off_. So - don't follow the instructions too automatically...
It is. Big Pharma is pretty unwilling to use non-antibody scaffolds for protein-based drugs. There are a fair number of antibody drugs on the market these days: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoclonal_antibody_therapy . There's not much in the pipeline for non-antibodies, because nobody knows how the immune system will react to introduced proteins. Antibodies are given a pass because they're part of the immune system; even then industry is careful not to modify the antibodies more than is strictly necessary.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand and agree with what you're saying...I just think that "different ways to say something" is shallow and trivial compared to actually having new ideas. Requiring novel expression as a tool to force students to develop as writers works really well, and banning plagiarism as immoral is correct, but there is no connection between the two: learning to write a phrase that sounds only half a bad as the perfected one you found in a review does not improve your knowledge of the subject or skills at anything other than writing. Developing writing is great, but not generally the point of the assignments in question.
The thing that's always bothered me about the "analyzing information for yourself" bit is that the paper subjects are in well-studied fields, such that any analysis you might do has already been done anyway. A half-competent researcher will then find that analysis, and they are stuck with ONLY literature review as an option, because someone else already wrote down an analysis the way they were going to analyze it!
Actually, looking at the timestamps, it was some sort of timestamp/database issue...the story nominally posted at 9:26 EST, but no posts at all show up until 9:48, at which point there are quite a few. You're right that the West Coast folks were blissfully snoozing.
I love how long this post has gone without replies (25 minutes, unless there's some sort of database lag I don't see). I guess that's a damning indictment of the US telecom industry and their pricing practices...
This was basically what we did in my CS101 and 102 classes: code up a system to store student records and class grades in C++. Students are objects! Put them in a vector! Put them in a list! Make your own list container class! (No, I am not seriously suggesting you use that software, of course...)
I'll second that these are depressing. I didn't particularly like them besides, but they were definitely depressing.
posting to undo mistaken mod (tried for Informative, finger slipped...)
All of the carcoleptics I know are only carcoleptic when not driving; being in control of the car seems to prevent it. Fortunate for them...
being in a vehicle you're not controlling yourself is uncomfortable and feels off. You don't anticipate bumps, corners etc. the same way. People will obviously have to learn to deal with this someday
I'm not sure I agree with this. Nobody learns to drive a car without having been a passenger first, so they're used to NOT controlling the vehicle before they get used to controlling it.
You missed a golden opportunity for the NO CARRIER joke...
my niece would always go to sleep after about 20 minutes
Carcolepsy: best sleep condition ever!
Easy, just use my patented DPUTFP method.
Don't Pick Up The Fucking Phone.
You PATENTED that? You bastard! No wonder people are getting in so many accidents, the best solution is locked up behind restrictive IP....
I recently watched the "Star Wars" hexology or 6-ology or whatever
Did you mean trilogy? There are only three, right?
They've supported the EFF with most of them...
*surprised; that's my karma for pointing out Cogs
My experience has been similar, but my hardware (5 year old integrated-graphics laptop) is so old that most of the failures are just insufficient resources. I usually throw in something near the minimum, then up it later if I really like one of the games. I LOVED Osmos and VVVVVV. Machinarium and Samorost 2 appear to be flash games so I'm surprosed they gave you trouble. PS, you have Cogs listed in both lists.
Well, we certainly can't disprove that the putative drivers are or are not drivers until AFTER the quantum computer exists. Therefore, any old bag of bits _could_ be functional quantum computer drivers, and we won't know until we try to use said bits as drivers. I guess one interpretation of that is that all possible bit sequences simultaneously are and are not drivers for this hypothetical hardware, and they don't become definitely-drivers or definitely-not-drivers until we "open the box" and try to use them as drivers.
I propose that the contents of this post, interpreted as ASCII text, are indeed maybe possibly quantum CPU drivers...in a Schrodinger's Cat sort of fashion. I've written plenty of code before, but this post qualifies as my first stab at a hardware driver!
I misread the headline as "Open-Source Quantum CPU Driver Published", and got very excited - quantum computing is here! - and then very confused as to how drivers could be written for hardware that doesn't exist yet.
I guess if Ada Lovelace could write a program for Babbage's Difference Engine without the hardware, maybe the open-source hardware folks could write quantum drivers.
Bufferbloat...is the result of our misguided attempt to protect streaming applications (now 80 percent of Internet packets) by putting large memory buffers in modems, routers, network cards, and applications. These cascading buffers interfere with each other and with the flow control built into TCP from the very beginning, ultimately breaking that flow control, making things far worse than they’d be if all those buffers simply didn’t exist.
We already *do* this....
We already did this to a large extent. Surely you've heard of the Komen foundation? When they're not getting in trouble for political mishaps, they fund a TON of cancer research via private donations. Similar groups exist for most first-world chronic diseases, although there isn't a lot of public-private funding of this sort for third-world infectious diseases (that I'm aware of).
No, no, you bet on how far the head would roll!
Unfortunately, if you already had it turned off, (as I apparently did), the "instructions" instead show you how to turn it _on_ rather than _off_. So - don't follow the instructions too automatically...
It decays at the same rate as one hand can clap.
It is. Big Pharma is pretty unwilling to use non-antibody scaffolds for protein-based drugs. There are a fair number of antibody drugs on the market these days: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoclonal_antibody_therapy . There's not much in the pipeline for non-antibodies, because nobody knows how the immune system will react to introduced proteins. Antibodies are given a pass because they're part of the immune system; even then industry is careful not to modify the antibodies more than is strictly necessary.