...or you could look at it as the sum of the areas of a series of rectangles, where the first is a 1 X 1 square, followed by 1 X 2, 1 X 3,... 1 X N. Now take each of these and stand them on end in ascending order; they form a right triangle with a jagged edge. Now take a copy of this "triangle" and place it atop the first so that the hypotenueses ajoin, ala,
CCCCC
CCCCT
CCCTT
CCTTT
CTTTT
TTTTT
Where in the above case N=5, the first triangle is comprised of the "T"s and the copy is comprised of the "C"s. We see that for any N the area is 1/2 of N*(N+1). Of course this goes a bit toward showing why I'm a topologist, and neither an analyst, an algabraeist, nor a number theorist.
I realize that this is a mightily pro-Linux sight, but I still can't see refering to the bash shell as ubiquitous. In fact, outside of Linux I've never seen it as the default shell, and don't necessarily even see it installed. In Solaris, HPUX, AIX and such the ksh or csh are certainly the standards.
Given that they beasties have an ir port, why hasn't someone gotten code out there to turn them into universal remotes?
There's a technology developed by IBM called x-10 that replaces light switches and power outlets in your house. These units can then send messages over the house's electrical system. Further there's one unit that has an antenna and accompanying remote control. From there once you define signals and responses, you can control everything from said remote control.
Then if folks pack their house with x-10 technology they can use their palm pilot (or whatever) to turn on the stereo, set it to NPR, turn on the lights to 50%, and start a pot of coffee -- and all before they get out of bed.
IBM's patent on x-10 technology expired about three years ago, so it's getting pretty affordable these days.
To be specific, the problem you're alluding to is a lack of continuity in the chart.
Clearly the probability of an object striking a target (us) should be mapped to such a metric in a continuous manner, hell for my tastes it should be smooth (c-infinity, anyone?).
Then, if you're going to talk about damage in a meaningful manner, say log(energy), you probably want to map this to your resultant metric smoothly.
Now, for any given object, such a scale should further be bounded above by the damage the given object would cause upon impact. This would result is a reasonably meaningful scalar representation of the threat. In other words, while having both numbers is preferable a meaningful single number could reasonably be constructed. The difficulty is that it would be defined by a function likely_damage = f( maximum_possible_damage, likelihood_of_impact ), rather than a pretty chart.
"Due to an underwriting or other
relationship between our firm and the issuer, no information about this issuer or filing can be displayed until a pricing range has been established."
From Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere
"The bourgeois public sphere may be conceived above all as the sphere of private people come together as a public; they soon claimed the public sphere regulated from above against the public authorities themselves, to engage them in a debate over the general rules governing relations in the basically privatized but publicly relevant sphere of commodity exchange and social labor. The medium of this political confrontation was peculiar and without historical precedent: people's public use of their reason (öffentliches Räsonnement). In our [German] usage this term (i.e., Räsonnement unmistakable preserves the polemical nuances of both sides: simultaneously the invocation of reason and its disdainful disparagement as merely malcontent griping" (27). [Like the English word, "Reflection" = thought;
satire.]
The inheritance tax simply precludes the timeless/deathless hoarding of capital within privileged families. Your implicit assumption is that class aristocrats are the appropriate ones to have and keep capital.
No one is proposing that the government become unlimited in power. You're simply scare-mongering. What's proposed here is that the rich be limited, at the very least across generations. The constitution prohibits titles of nobility, Reagan excepted it seems. Fully a century ago Eugene V. Debs realized that we were entering an aristocracy of wealth and education, and repealing the inheritance tax only work to more soundly entrench an entitled class.
Lets looks at some simple arithmetic. I'll grant you that the top 10% pay 33% (or so) of the taxes. That's because they have more than 10% of the wealth. Now if GWB has his way, they'll get well over 50% of the tax cut. By my math, that means that they are getting a tax cut OUT OF PROPORTION to their tax burden. This works to undermine our progressive tax structure.
To recap: 50+% / 33% > 1
Call me crazy, but at what point in the process of artists putting out their music on the web, in any given format, do they make a so called profit. I'll grant you the fact that the 'net allows artists to promote and distribute their music easily, in digital format, but how many people do you know that send the artist any money when they download and listen to a mp3?
Perhaps there are some few artists out there burning their own cds and getting orders directly from consumers AND making anything like a living from this, but I'm unaware of any of them.
In all honesty, I think that most folks here are lauding Ms. Love's actions because it lets them ignore that fact that they aren't doing a damn'd thing for the actual artists.
Support independent music labels and independent music stores online and off, instead of just trading mp3 files like kids in a candy store.
Slashdot Mirror
CCCCC
CCCCT
CCCTT
CCTTT
CTTTT
TTTTT
Where in the above case N=5, the first triangle is comprised of the "T"s and the copy is comprised of the "C"s. We see that for any N the area is 1/2 of N*(N+1). Of course this goes a bit toward showing why I'm a topologist, and neither an analyst, an algabraeist, nor a number theorist.
cheers
My 2 cents.
Scott
Given that they beasties have an ir port, why hasn't someone gotten code out there to turn them into universal remotes? There's a technology developed by IBM called x-10 that replaces light switches and power outlets in your house. These units can then send messages over the house's electrical system. Further there's one unit that has an antenna and accompanying remote control. From there once you define signals and responses, you can control everything from said remote control. Then if folks pack their house with x-10 technology they can use their palm pilot (or whatever) to turn on the stereo, set it to NPR, turn on the lights to 50%, and start a pot of coffee -- and all before they get out of bed. IBM's patent on x-10 technology expired about three years ago, so it's getting pretty affordable these days.
Clearly the probability of an object striking a target (us) should be mapped to such a metric in a continuous manner, hell for my tastes it should be smooth (c-infinity, anyone?).
Then, if you're going to talk about damage in a meaningful manner, say log(energy), you probably want to map this to your resultant metric smoothly.
Now, for any given object, such a scale should further be bounded above by the damage the given object would cause upon impact. This would result is a reasonably meaningful scalar representation of the threat. In other words, while having both numbers is preferable a meaningful single number could reasonably be constructed. The difficulty is that it would be defined by a function likely_damage = f( maximum_possible_damage, likelihood_of_impact ), rather than a pretty chart.
500-to-1 means that there is a 500/(500+1) = 99.80% chance of collision.
1-to-500 means 1/(1+500) = .1996%
1-in-500 means 1/500 = .2%
This last number is the one reported in the original article.
But you can check back for updated info: www.ipo.com: TurboLinux, Inc.
From Jurgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere "The bourgeois public sphere may be conceived above all as the sphere of private people come together as a public; they soon claimed the public sphere regulated from above against the public authorities themselves, to engage them in a debate over the general rules governing relations in the basically privatized but publicly relevant sphere of commodity exchange and social labor. The medium of this political confrontation was peculiar and without historical precedent: people's public use of their reason (öffentliches Räsonnement). In our [German] usage this term (i.e., Räsonnement unmistakable preserves the polemical nuances of both sides: simultaneously the invocation of reason and its disdainful disparagement as merely malcontent griping" (27). [Like the English word, "Reflection" = thought; satire.]
The inheritance tax simply precludes the timeless/deathless hoarding of capital within privileged families. Your implicit assumption is that class aristocrats are the appropriate ones to have and keep capital.
No one is proposing that the government become unlimited in power. You're simply scare-mongering. What's proposed here is that the rich be limited, at the very least across generations. The constitution prohibits titles of nobility, Reagan excepted it seems. Fully a century ago Eugene V. Debs realized that we were entering an aristocracy of wealth and education, and repealing the inheritance tax only work to more soundly entrench an entitled class.
Lets looks at some simple arithmetic. I'll grant you that the top 10% pay 33% (or so) of the taxes. That's because they have more than 10% of the wealth. Now if GWB has his way, they'll get well over 50% of the tax cut. By my math, that means that they are getting a tax cut OUT OF PROPORTION to their tax burden. This works to undermine our progressive tax structure. To recap: 50+% / 33% > 1
Call me crazy, but at what point in the process of artists putting out their music on the web, in any given format, do they make a so called profit. I'll grant you the fact that the 'net allows artists to promote and distribute their music easily, in digital format, but how many people do you know that send the artist any money when they download and listen to a mp3? Perhaps there are some few artists out there burning their own cds and getting orders directly from consumers AND making anything like a living from this, but I'm unaware of any of them. In all honesty, I think that most folks here are lauding Ms. Love's actions because it lets them ignore that fact that they aren't doing a damn'd thing for the actual artists. Support independent music labels and independent music stores online and off, instead of just trading mp3 files like kids in a candy store.
I'm hopeful that Nautilus/Eazel will fill the role for Linux distros that Windows Update does for Windows XX.