H.264s development was open? I mean really that is just a bit of a reach.
Far more so than VP8's development was until last May. At least with H.264 it was being developed between different companies and industry groups whereas VP8 was a closed-source, proprietary codec developed by a two-bit company that almost no consumer before Google's buy out had every heard of.
If your results are different because you had a small sample size, then they DID come about by chance.
False dilemma. It could also mean you have a biased sample that is skewing the data which in no way means that your result came about through chance. Yet those results can still be statistically significant.
Which is something different than just statistical significance. To also quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significancewikipedia:
In statistics, a result is called statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance. The phrase test of significance was coined by Ronald Fisher.[1] As used in statistics, significant does not mean important or meaningful, as it does in everyday speech. For example, a study that included tens of thousands of participants might be able to say with great confidence that residents of one city were more intelligent than people of another city by 1/20 of an IQ point. This result would be statistically significant, but the difference is small enough to be utterly unimportant. Many researchers urge that tests of significance should always be accompanied by effect-size statistics, which approximate the size and thus the practical importance of the difference.
Maybe you should re-read some books on statistics again?
I normally don't respond to trolls
Ah yes, one MUST be a troll to disagree with the all-mighty myrdos2, right?
Linux is one of the potential components of your workflow as a computer scientist, and one of the major potential platforms for any work you may want to do.
And yet computer science seemed to do just fine as a field for some 50 years before the first version of Linux was even released.
If they haven't already looked at linux, it's because they lack the innate curiosity to find out more about their chosen profession.
Ahh the old LinuxTeachesCS(TM) nonsense. Why do you assume someone lacks innate curiosity because they ignore Linux? What if they would use SysV Unix or a BSD? Learning about kernels, compilers, programming languages, parallelization, AI, computer logic, computer architecture is completely OS agnostic.
Discounting the ones who will be quickly switching majors or dropping out, sed, awk and regex are going to convert Windows/Mac users to command line Linux.
Why would they do so when Mac users already have those programs and you can get it for Windows by installing SFU for anyone actually interested.
There is no real debate. The people who actually know the science are largely in agreement about the conclusions. The "debate" being spoke of is faux debate stirred up by people from think tanks funded by oil companies. It's about as meaningful as fundy wackos going on about how there is large debate over the legitimacy over the theory of evolution.
So if Market share was the only indication WebM is a long way in the lead...and with YouTubes backing!?
But YouTube is going to be forced to continue supporting H.264 because of the iPhone and Android devices. That is unless Google is planning on either replacing all Android devices with ones that have a VP8 decoder ASIC or making Android phones battery life abysmal by forcing the use of a software VP8 decoder.
They won't support H.264 because its proprietary but they went out of there way to support Flash.
And yet they are forced to support it via streaming from Youtube lest they wreak all sorts of havoc on Android devices. That is unless they want to kill the battery usages of Android devices by forcing them to use a software VP8 decoder instead of the H.264 ASIC built into the phone.
And what is that useful point? To inject more politics and bullshit into the scientific process? I'm sorry, but despite what these oil-company backed think tanks say, there is no global scientific conspiracy to force you back into the dark ages and to live like vegan hippies.
Feel free to go see the quoted source in any article and then you've got something but wikipedia articles by themselves with no external sources that can be checked are the same reliability as a random forum post.
Except in the cases that have cropped up where you have cyclical citations. There are cases where an article has had incorrect facts cited in an article which then became used as a citation in the wikipedia article to keep around the false facts.
If the test showed statistical significance, it won't matter if they increase the sample size, the results will be the same.
Wrong. Statistical significance implies nothing of the sort. All it says is that the results didn't come about by chance it in no way implies that the same results will happen regardless of sample size nor that the results are even meaningful. Maybe you should actually go back and relearn the basics of statistics before spouting off such nonsense?
It seems as if he's advocating making fonts and such harder to read, so that we are more likely to remember what we read, regardless of whether what we are reading is some trashy novel or a manual that we need to know to save lives.
And yet he posts it to a blog using an easy to read font. Apparently he didn't want any to be more likely to remember his discovery?
And yet despite this supposed discovery the person put it out on a webpage which has to be read on a computer screen. I guess he didn't think his discovery was that important since we are all now going to forget it easier? Wouldn't it have been preferable to put scanned images of his handwriting instead?
You do realize that the amoritized cost of an H.264 license for any company the size of google is fractions of a cent per customer, right? The royalties, which they don't have to even pay for streaming Youtube videos, is maxed out at a few million dollars which is less than they spend on a month worth of cafeteria costs.
my main point was that if the state requires you to make calls while not at your desk then it must either provide a means for you to do so or reimburse your efforts at making those calls
Really? Based on what law MUST they reimburse you? Are you confusing a nicety that they do with some sort of legal obligation?
Slashdot Mirror
H.264s development was open? I mean really that is just a bit of a reach.
Far more so than VP8's development was until last May. At least with H.264 it was being developed between different companies and industry groups whereas VP8 was a closed-source, proprietary codec developed by a two-bit company that almost no consumer before Google's buy out had every heard of.
If your results are different because you had a small sample size, then they DID come about by chance.
False dilemma. It could also mean you have a biased sample that is skewing the data which in no way means that your result came about through chance. Yet those results can still be statistically significant.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_power
Which is something different than just statistical significance. To also quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significancewikipedia:
In statistics, a result is called statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance. The phrase test of significance was coined by Ronald Fisher.[1] As used in statistics, significant does not mean important or meaningful, as it does in everyday speech. For example, a study that included tens of thousands of participants might be able to say with great confidence that residents of one city were more intelligent than people of another city by 1/20 of an IQ point. This result would be statistically significant, but the difference is small enough to be utterly unimportant. Many researchers urge that tests of significance should always be accompanied by effect-size statistics, which approximate the size and thus the practical importance of the difference.
Maybe you should re-read some books on statistics again?
I normally don't respond to trolls
Ah yes, one MUST be a troll to disagree with the all-mighty myrdos2, right?
Linux is one of the potential components of your workflow as a computer scientist, and one of the major potential platforms for any work you may want to do.
And yet computer science seemed to do just fine as a field for some 50 years before the first version of Linux was even released.
If they haven't already looked at linux, it's because they lack the innate curiosity to find out more about their chosen profession.
Ahh the old LinuxTeachesCS(TM) nonsense. Why do you assume someone lacks innate curiosity because they ignore Linux? What if they would use SysV Unix or a BSD? Learning about kernels, compilers, programming languages, parallelization, AI, computer logic, computer architecture is completely OS agnostic.
Discounting the ones who will be quickly switching majors or dropping out, sed, awk and regex are going to convert Windows/Mac users to command line Linux.
Why would they do so when Mac users already have those programs and you can get it for Windows by installing SFU for anyone actually interested.
Nothing says high quality audio like speakers that use paper-cone drivers!
There is no real debate. The people who actually know the science are largely in agreement about the conclusions. The "debate" being spoke of is faux debate stirred up by people from think tanks funded by oil companies. It's about as meaningful as fundy wackos going on about how there is large debate over the legitimacy over the theory of evolution.
So if Market share was the only indication WebM is a long way in the lead...and with YouTubes backing!?
But YouTube is going to be forced to continue supporting H.264 because of the iPhone and Android devices. That is unless Google is planning on either replacing all Android devices with ones that have a VP8 decoder ASIC or making Android phones battery life abysmal by forcing the use of a software VP8 decoder.
They won't support H.264 because its proprietary but they went out of there way to support Flash.
And yet they are forced to support it via streaming from Youtube lest they wreak all sorts of havoc on Android devices. That is unless they want to kill the battery usages of Android devices by forcing them to use a software VP8 decoder instead of the H.264 ASIC built into the phone.
And what is that useful point? To inject more politics and bullshit into the scientific process? I'm sorry, but despite what these oil-company backed think tanks say, there is no global scientific conspiracy to force you back into the dark ages and to live like vegan hippies.
Feel free to go see the quoted source in any article and then you've got something but wikipedia articles by themselves with no external sources that can be checked are the same reliability as a random forum post.
Except in the cases that have cropped up where you have cyclical citations. There are cases where an article has had incorrect facts cited in an article which then became used as a citation in the wikipedia article to keep around the false facts.
If the test showed statistical significance, it won't matter if they increase the sample size, the results will be the same.
Wrong. Statistical significance implies nothing of the sort. All it says is that the results didn't come about by chance it in no way implies that the same results will happen regardless of sample size nor that the results are even meaningful. Maybe you should actually go back and relearn the basics of statistics before spouting off such nonsense?
Of course. How else could he get people to buy junk like anything from Bose if not for lying?
It seems as if he's advocating making fonts and such harder to read, so that we are more likely to remember what we read, regardless of whether what we are reading is some trashy novel or a manual that we need to know to save lives.
And yet he posts it to a blog using an easy to read font. Apparently he didn't want any to be more likely to remember his discovery?
Oh and he even used an easy to read font on his blog. Double fail!
And yet despite this supposed discovery the person put it out on a webpage which has to be read on a computer screen. I guess he didn't think his discovery was that important since we are all now going to forget it easier? Wouldn't it have been preferable to put scanned images of his handwriting instead?
That means sweatshops for iPods
The same sweatshops making your beloved Android phones as well.
You do realize that the amoritized cost of an H.264 license for any company the size of google is fractions of a cent per customer, right? The royalties, which they don't have to even pay for streaming Youtube videos, is maxed out at a few million dollars which is less than they spend on a month worth of cafeteria costs.
Not to mention that the review sounds like it was chunked out in 5 minutes by a half-literate 8 year old.
Yeah and lots of little cuts like this end up,you guessed, it as a big cut. Why WOULDN'T they do all these easy cuts first?
my main point was that if the state requires you to make calls while not at your desk then it must either provide a means for you to do so or reimburse your efforts at making those calls
Really? Based on what law MUST they reimburse you? Are you confusing a nicety that they do with some sort of legal obligation?
Except that this has nothing to do with any online rights. These people have no 'right' to a state-paid cell phone.
Because not everything behind a router needs a public address?
Because they only distribute source code. MPEG-LA has allowed source code exception for implementing their patent pool for ages.
Yes, because using a real guitar to play a game is totally hardcore, bro! I'm sure all the chicks just are falling at your feet over that.