I should point out that it would be nice if networking devices in general would look at priority tags attached to packets when choosing which to throw away.
It's ridiculous that it's 2010 and these things are still ignored.
Why in the world would you want an ADSL2+ modem (or any modem or media adapter other than ethernet or USB) built in to your router?
One word: bursting. If you're trying to prioritize traffic, you need to be aware of what the top speed of your ADSL or cable modem is. Nowadays, most cable modems are capable of "bursting" at far higher rates than the long-run limit.
Unfortunately, if you program the long-run limit into your traffic shaper, you lose the benefit of bursting, and getting a traffic shaper to be aware of bursting would almost certainly require a level of precision that is best accomplished IN THE MODEM ITSELF!
Hence why it's good to have the routing done in the modem, or have the standard interface to the modem be a bit more intelligent than ethernet. Good luck with the latter.
As mentioned by the previous post, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) is an active area of research, although some of it flaky.
More cogent to your case, however, MRI itself has been rigorously shown to have anti-depressant effects and also relieve bi-polar disorder. The MRI used was an EP-MRSI. It would be interesting to find out if this is the kind your wife experienced.
Can't you imagine a reason why a Republican might be visiting the Colbert Report for pre-existing factors which negatively affect their contributions?
Seriously, why exactly WOULD a republican choose to appear on a show which so effectively ridicules him? Might it be because he might already be in dire straights? WHO'D A THUNK IT!
Cause and effect requires a bit of cogitatin' with the ol' noggin.
I think the reason we were subjected to shitloads of soulless CGI wasn't because Lucas is blind, but rather because along with JarJar collectibles, he's ALSO MARKETING LucasFilm/ILM as a movie production powerhouse. No doubt there's yet more millions to be made by using Star Wars as a showboat for his render farm. Unfortunately his friend Spielberg is also in on this plan, and it seems like only a few underfunded outsiders in Sci Fi realize that puppetry and costumes are still better than CGI.
I acknowledge this may change some day, of course.
Is it necessarily true that "Asians" are overrepresented in US colleges when the population of the entire world is considered? There are a few billion of them, after all. And many - actually most - of my classmates in graduate school are from outside the US. I've heard it argued that this benefits US college students because international students are often paying more or of a higher quality than citizens. So if that's the case, then it would make sense that a large number of them come from Asia.
I guess the real question now is whether that's the case.
Remember WindowMaker? One day the new WindowMaker developers decided that an option named "AUTOCIRCULATE" made more sense if it meant something completely different from what it had for years. And support for the old option, which was one of the easiest ways to change focus without raising a window to the top, disappeared.
Around the same time the Debian wmaker package was also stripped of ALL KEYBOARD SHORTCUTS in the name of "correctness". Complaints were lodged, rebutted, parried, delayed and now it seems the package has fallen into deep disrepair. The current maintainer says he will try to reverse this brain damage, but progress has yet to take hold.
I think most people gave up and moved on to one of the "chunky"/flashy fisher-price style window managers or blackbox.
The lesson? Never "upgrade" unless you have to. Now this POS wmaker version is "release quality" and polluting all branches of Debian, so downgrading is a bitch.
I share your sentiment about americanization, though even within the supposed hard sciences popularity and eloquence have of course biased the recognition of achievements for centuries.
For instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_eponymy :.. In its simplest and strongest form it says: "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." In philology it is known as the "Rule of the Lesser Attribution." Historical acclaim and reputation tend to be allocated to people unevenly. Scientific observations and results are often associated with people who have high visibility and social status, and are named long after their discovery. Eponymy is a striking example of this phenomenon. Particularly important scientific observations are often associated with a person, as in the case of Gaussian distribution, Halley's comet, and Planck's constant. Historians of science, however, have noted that often the person who is associated with the particular observation, theory, or result was not its original inventor. Based on his studies on the history of statistics, Stephen Stigler therefore proposed his own "Stigler's Law of Eponymy."
Stigler attributes the discovery of Stigler's Law to Robert K. Merton. See Matthew effect and obliteration by incorporation... And Wikipedia's elision of "Stigler" from this article's title is itself an example of obliteration by incorporation
while it is mine, I am the one that decides when, how, where, and who copies my work, not anyone else.
Wrong. Common law like the Doctrine of First Sale and Fair Use preserve what meager rights to copying your work copyright law retains for the public after grantings its concessions which enticed you to release it to the public in the first place. Presumably to promote the progress of the arts and sciences. We'd want "your" work to some degree become the public's as well if we're going to do that, no?
Actually, it might be less expensive to PREEMPTIVELY freeze baby boomers before they begin hemorrhaging medical expenses. We can wake them up later, when we can afford it.
It should be enabled by default, though indicated to those who want to know about it. Why? Because tracking click-throughs happens one way or the other and the current way is horrifically slow (but also maintains your privacy by only allowing webmasters to see where you're EXITing their site).
The new way makes the process shitloads faster while preserving the existing and pretty reasonable bounds of privacy.
Would you rather hit a redirect with every google link and wait for your browser to build up a second connection to the real site OR immediately connect to the real site from the very beginning, while the tracking shit completes in the background? I'd vote for backgrounding any day, but it's not going to happen with reactionary hoards of knee jerkers on slashdot getting it disabled by default.
As to the silent operation of this feature: that's already being accomplished with javascript. Though I agree that in both cases the browser should make it easier to see what's going to happen when you click a link.
Some people look around themselves and marvel at the "intricate beauty" but the obvious fact of the matter is we live in a world whose blueprints were drawn on the wall with a fist full of feces. I don't really have to make my case here. A person of moderate intelligence could beat God in SimUniverse.
So I believe it's time to mobilize the Retarded Design camp and 'balance' the debate in classrooms across the nation. Why God is Submongoloid vs. Why God deserves an IQ above 100, much less omniscience. Both sides hopefully presented by supra-mongoloids, but what can you do; you have to work with what God gave you.
Naturally, that javascript could confirm whether or not it was able to set the cookie.
Also keep in mind Google doesn't (or shouldn't) really care if a few fractions of a percent are able to click through their ads without generating revenue. Google isn't trying to keep its advertisers or their URLs secret. Instead, Google's bread and butter is in keeping its Adsense relevant to the buyers and sellers who may actually meet through it (hell I leave it off Adblock because I actually want to read Google's ads sometimes) - but if Google becomes a medium for noisy, irrelevant garbage and corruption like so many punch the monkey shockwaves, I'm blocking/ignoring it. And so will millions of others, so sayeth the Book of Pimproot.
Any ideas for how Google could stymie third world Clickshops if it wanted to? My best idea so far is for it to generate some obfuscated javascript which decodes a one-use-only url for clicking. That takes care of most robots around today. Next, have that script set some cookie so an individual browser is limited to charging a max of about 3-5 click-throughs per site. Or use some other scriptborne method to uniquely identify browsers. Who the frick browses without javascript anymore? 0.000000000000000001% of the browsing public? Are they legitimately clicking on ads?
Once the Redskins stop working as a predictor, we can analyze TV snow until we find the precise time & location for God's voice to emanate across the ether. Maybe it'll come on the Red channel. Curve fit until it works.
There *are* fewer families with three girls than with two and a boy! Just like your chances of getting a 50% by guessing on a true-false quiz are higher than any other score. The reason is obvious: flip a coin twice. Getting heads only once is twice as likely as getting heads twice. Really! Try it!
This is also why 11 and 12 stats are so much more likely than 18s when rolling a character in D&D - more ways for the dice to add up to those numbers. Basic laws of combos. This distribution is also what the central limit theorem shows will approach a bell curve as the number of dice increases. Yes, with billions of children you are virtually guaranteed an even split being more likely than unisex. The mating worries of the world abate..
Karma clown, rub a little on my post further down..
Birth order and unique assignment miss the mark. What matters is how you were provided with knowledge of two girls. If "you" came to know two entities *at random* and discovered they were female, discovery of a third girl would be fifty-fifty. If, on the other hand, you asked someone with knowledge of all three children to show you two girls, your interpretation would be undeniable. A similar illustration of knowledge-barriers exists in the Monty Hall Problem.
Careful description of the "curtain" or "door" and what happens behind it makes all the difference:
If you checked a few hundred families into a hotel and visited the 3-child rooms, here is what may happen:
1. You courteously knock on each door and ask to meet two young ladies. Maybe you offer candy. From the rooms where it is possible to honor your request, the giggle fits deliver you two girls.
The probability that the unmet child would be a boy is 75%.
2. You use your bellhop access to break into rooms and count children. Regardless of whether you proceed by birth order, the nearness to your lasso, or any other gender-blind manner, the third child you count will approach.5 maleness.
The possibilities of #2: BBB BBG BGB GBB BGG GBG [GGB GGG]
The possibilities of #1: BBB BBG BGB GBB [BGG GBG GGB GGG]
The crucial factor is a pre-sorting function. One may or may not have been implied by "two in the room are girls." Are there some in another room, R Kelley? Did you stumble upon the first two by chance, or did you ask for them? It seems there are two "yous" in your problem, the one who knows all three children and the one who doesn't.
Which cable gets priority over where the platter spins? DoS: I bet you could seriously cripple the write speed of the "secure" zone, if not eliminate its access to the disk through hogging and/or olde skool motor fatigue hardware destruction.
Yeah, that doesn't necessarily modify the data. BUT you can already remap all requests to the "read-only" zone, assuming it's compromised. So the external world sees the same result: keebler elves own u.
Assuming the hardware xploitation is accounted for, this disk's functionality is essentially emulated with a unidirectional backup. We all know how to do that, right? Leaving the market for this white elephant to the money-is-no-object / NSA / all-obfuscation-r-belong-to-us crowd.
Slashdot Mirror
I should point out that it would be nice if networking devices in general would look at priority tags attached to packets when choosing which to throw away.
It's ridiculous that it's 2010 and these things are still ignored.
Why in the world would you want an ADSL2+ modem (or any modem or media adapter other than ethernet or USB) built in to your router?
One word: bursting. If you're trying to prioritize traffic, you need to be aware of what the top speed of your ADSL or cable modem is. Nowadays, most cable modems are capable of "bursting" at far higher rates than the long-run limit.
Unfortunately, if you program the long-run limit into your traffic shaper, you lose the benefit of bursting, and getting a traffic shaper to be aware of bursting would almost certainly require a level of precision that is best accomplished IN THE MODEM ITSELF!
Hence why it's good to have the routing done in the modem, or have the standard interface to the modem be a bit more intelligent than ethernet. Good luck with the latter.
Some geriatric cottonhead with a pacemaker in a high speed chase with police... sounds like some good slapstick comedy.
As mentioned by the previous post, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) is an active area of research, although some of it flaky.
More cogent to your case, however, MRI itself has been rigorously shown to have anti-depressant effects and also relieve bi-polar disorder. The MRI used was an EP-MRSI. It would be interesting to find out if this is the kind your wife experienced.
http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/05/magnetically-lifted-spir.html
"Eddie kept pitching me that they come to Earth in contemporary times, and everyone's cheering and happy, and cut to the White House and the President goes, "Nuke 'em!" And they destroy Galactica -- cut to credits." -- Ron Moore at http://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/index.ssf/2009/03/battlestar_galactica_ronald_d.html
haha. hahahaha.
Can't you imagine a reason why a Republican might be visiting the Colbert Report for pre-existing factors which negatively affect their contributions?
Seriously, why exactly WOULD a republican choose to appear on a show which so effectively ridicules him? Might it be because he might already be in dire straights? WHO'D A THUNK IT!
Cause and effect requires a bit of cogitatin' with the ol' noggin.
I think the reason we were subjected to shitloads of soulless CGI wasn't because Lucas is blind, but rather because along with JarJar collectibles, he's ALSO MARKETING LucasFilm/ILM as a movie production powerhouse. No doubt there's yet more millions to be made by using Star Wars as a showboat for his render farm. Unfortunately his friend Spielberg is also in on this plan, and it seems like only a few underfunded outsiders in Sci Fi realize that puppetry and costumes are still better than CGI.
I acknowledge this may change some day, of course.
Is it necessarily true that "Asians" are overrepresented in US colleges when the population of the entire world is considered? There are a few billion of them, after all. And many - actually most - of my classmates in graduate school are from outside the US. I've heard it argued that this benefits US college students because international students are often paying more or of a higher quality than citizens. So if that's the case, then it would make sense that a large number of them come from Asia.
I guess the real question now is whether that's the case.
How about just stipulating that ISPs be upfront about how they're running their networks, say by posting that information to the public.
ISP conspiracies would be less likely to happen at that point, given that people would actually have a clear idea of what they're paying for.
Remember WindowMaker? One day the new WindowMaker developers decided that an option named "AUTOCIRCULATE" made more sense if it meant something completely different from what it had for years. And support for the old option, which was one of the easiest ways to change focus without raising a window to the top, disappeared. Around the same time the Debian wmaker package was also stripped of ALL KEYBOARD SHORTCUTS in the name of "correctness". Complaints were lodged, rebutted, parried, delayed and now it seems the package has fallen into deep disrepair. The current maintainer says he will try to reverse this brain damage, but progress has yet to take hold. I think most people gave up and moved on to one of the "chunky"/flashy fisher-price style window managers or blackbox. The lesson? Never "upgrade" unless you have to. Now this POS wmaker version is "release quality" and polluting all branches of Debian, so downgrading is a bitch.
Is there a specific reason why sewers can't be used for cables aside from the unwillingness of technicians to get dirty?
The transformers and whatnot could remain above-ground, of course. This question has been bugging me for years.
I share your sentiment about americanization, though even within the supposed hard sciences popularity and eloquence have of course biased the recognition of achievements for centuries.
..
..
For instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_eponymy :
In its simplest and strongest form it says: "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." In philology it is known as the "Rule of the Lesser Attribution." Historical acclaim and reputation tend to be allocated to people unevenly. Scientific observations and results are often associated with people who have high visibility and social status, and are named long after their discovery. Eponymy is a striking example of this phenomenon. Particularly important scientific observations are often associated with a person, as in the case of Gaussian distribution, Halley's comet, and Planck's constant. Historians of science, however, have noted that often the person who is associated with the particular observation, theory, or result was not its original inventor. Based on his studies on the history of statistics, Stephen Stigler therefore proposed his own "Stigler's Law of Eponymy."
Stigler attributes the discovery of Stigler's Law to Robert K. Merton. See Matthew effect and obliteration by incorporation.
And Wikipedia's elision of "Stigler" from this article's title is itself an example of obliteration by incorporation
Wrong. Common law like the Doctrine of First Sale and Fair Use preserve what meager rights to copying your work copyright law retains for the public after grantings its concessions which enticed you to release it to the public in the first place. Presumably to promote the progress of the arts and sciences. We'd want "your" work to some degree become the public's as well if we're going to do that, no?
Actually, not all forms of ice are less dense than water. Ice V, specifically, is very close to the density of water.
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html
Actually, it might be less expensive to PREEMPTIVELY freeze baby boomers before they begin hemorrhaging medical expenses. We can wake them up later, when we can afford it.
Florida is already 50% shuffleboard.
It should be enabled by default, though indicated to those who want to know about it. Why? Because tracking click-throughs happens one way or the other and the current way is horrifically slow (but also maintains your privacy by only allowing webmasters to see where you're EXITing their site).
The new way makes the process shitloads faster while preserving the existing and pretty reasonable bounds of privacy.
Would you rather hit a redirect with every google link and wait for your browser to build up a second connection to the real site OR immediately connect to the real site from the very beginning, while the tracking shit completes in the background? I'd vote for backgrounding any day, but it's not going to happen with reactionary hoards of knee jerkers on slashdot getting it disabled by default.
As to the silent operation of this feature: that's already being accomplished with javascript. Though I agree that in both cases the browser should make it easier to see what's going to happen when you click a link.
Some people look around themselves and marvel at the "intricate beauty" but the obvious fact of the matter is we live in a world whose blueprints were drawn on the wall with a fist full of feces. I don't really have to make my case here. A person of moderate intelligence could beat God in SimUniverse.
So I believe it's time to mobilize the Retarded Design camp and 'balance' the debate in classrooms across the nation. Why God is Submongoloid vs. Why God deserves an IQ above 100, much less omniscience. Both sides hopefully presented by supra-mongoloids, but what can you do; you have to work with what God gave you.
Naturally, that javascript could confirm whether or not it was able to set the cookie.
Also keep in mind Google doesn't (or shouldn't) really care if a few fractions of a percent are able to click through their ads without generating revenue. Google isn't trying to keep its advertisers or their URLs secret. Instead, Google's bread and butter is in keeping its Adsense relevant to the buyers and sellers who may actually meet through it (hell I leave it off Adblock because I actually want to read Google's ads sometimes) - but if Google becomes a medium for noisy, irrelevant garbage and corruption like so many punch the monkey shockwaves, I'm blocking/ignoring it. And so will millions of others, so sayeth the Book of Pimproot.
Any ideas for how Google could stymie third world Clickshops if it wanted to? My best idea so far is for it to generate some obfuscated javascript which decodes a one-use-only url for clicking. That takes care of most robots around today. Next, have that script set some cookie so an individual browser is limited to charging a max of about 3-5 click-throughs per site. Or use some other scriptborne method to uniquely identify browsers. Who the frick browses without javascript anymore? 0.000000000000000001% of the browsing public? Are they legitimately clicking on ads?
Once the Redskins stop working as a predictor, we can analyze TV snow until we find the precise time & location for God's voice to emanate across the ether. Maybe it'll come on the Red channel. Curve fit until it works.
[substanstiate reified thoughtification]--> commerce
-[adjectivize]--> commercial
-[verblate]--> commercialize
--[tensify preteritic]-> commercialized
walk halfway to destination. repeat.
There *are* fewer families with three girls than with two and a boy! Just like your chances of getting a 50% by guessing on a true-false quiz are higher than any other score. The reason is obvious: flip a coin twice. Getting heads only once is twice as likely as getting heads twice. Really! Try it!
This is also why 11 and 12 stats are so much more likely than 18s when rolling a character in D&D - more ways for the dice to add up to those numbers. Basic laws of combos. This distribution is also what the central limit theorem shows will approach a bell curve as the number of dice increases. Yes, with billions of children you are virtually guaranteed an even split being more likely than unisex. The mating worries of the world abate..
Karma clown, rub a little on my post further down..
Birth order and unique assignment miss the mark. What matters is how you were provided with knowledge of two girls. If "you" came to know two entities *at random* and discovered they were female, discovery of a third girl would be fifty-fifty. If, on the other hand, you asked someone with knowledge of all three children to show you two girls, your interpretation would be undeniable. A similar illustration of knowledge-barriers exists in the Monty Hall Problem.
.5 maleness.
Careful description of the "curtain" or "door" and what happens behind it makes all the difference:
If you checked a few hundred families into a hotel and visited the 3-child rooms, here is what may happen:
1. You courteously knock on each door and ask to meet two young ladies. Maybe you offer candy. From the rooms where it is possible to honor your request, the giggle fits deliver you two girls.
The probability that the unmet child would be a boy is 75%.
2. You use your bellhop access to break into rooms and count children. Regardless of whether you proceed by birth order, the nearness to your lasso, or any other gender-blind manner, the third child you count will approach
The possibilities of #2:
BBB BBG BGB GBB BGG GBG [GGB GGG]
The possibilities of #1:
BBB BBG BGB GBB [BGG GBG GGB GGG]
The crucial factor is a pre-sorting function. One may or may not have been implied by "two in the room are girls." Are there some in another room, R Kelley? Did you stumble upon the first two by chance, or did you ask for them? It seems there are two "yous" in your problem, the one who knows all three children and the one who doesn't.
Yeah. Hardware locking can get you a dynamic unidirectionally updated disk. At IDE speeds.
But see my other message about the white elephant aspect.
Which cable gets priority over where the platter spins? DoS: I bet you could seriously cripple the write speed of the "secure" zone, if not eliminate its access to the disk through hogging and/or olde skool motor fatigue hardware destruction.
Yeah, that doesn't necessarily modify the data. BUT you can already remap all requests to the "read-only" zone, assuming it's compromised. So the external world sees the same result: keebler elves own u.
Assuming the hardware xploitation is accounted for, this disk's functionality is essentially emulated with a unidirectional backup. We all know how to do that, right? Leaving the market for this white elephant to the money-is-no-object / NSA / all-obfuscation-r-belong-to-us crowd.