Get real, MP's vote for their manifesto and act to further their political careers. They will help with issues that don't conflict with those two aims. That won't change, no matter how many emails you send.
And not being ignored doesn't mean I got the result I wanted in all cases. I'm no th eonly person in the constituency and there are conflicting issues. In those cases you have to get involved and campaign to change the political landscape and again simply filling an inbox with emails will not do that.
As to your point about noticing them in a group, how do you know that a personal approach would not have worked much better, my dealing with my MPs (Charles Kennedy and then Danny Alexander) have always yielded good results within a few days. I've never been ignored.
You fill out the form once and the lobby firm sends repeated emails.
"you have to ask why voters are having to do this to be noticed". Voters don't have to do this, it just seems an easy way to have influence. But real influence takes time and work.
This MP was interviewed last night with a representative of the lobby group. The lobbiest had polled his members in the MP's constituency and the majority wanted the group to keep emailing the MP. So the (majority of) 400 members (read self selected) of the group in that constituency want to flood the MP's inbox at the expense of the 50,000 other voters in the contituency who comunicate directly. If I was the MP I would have just routed the emails to the deleted items folder
If you actually care about your politics or campaign, then write to your MP direct. Simply filling in a form and spamming MP's simply stops the people who do care from communicating with their MP.
Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, we should just have an arms race between different lobby groups who would automatically send every MP a million emails a day just to show how much we care about an issue.
Yes, I tend to agree. Otherwise a proprietary application running on GNU/linux would have to be GPL'ed as soon as it supplies a callback function to the OS.
If I remember correctly, things may have changed, C++ is supposed to be implemented as a precompiler for C. Which means that for a new system you need only need to transfer the precompiled output (C) and then put it through a bootstrap C compiler on the new system.
As I say things may have changed.
I seem to remember that this is the kind of size for a first human study. I guess this is to make sure that the patients didn't die / develop cancer / turn into zombies. The more detailed studies will happen, but I think when you get to the human trial stage, the ethical considerations suggest a small group.
"One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. Santiago might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them."
There are a couple of major problems with this paragraph.
1. The is an implied assuption that if you can win at something then it cannot be art, an assuption that he provides no evidence for. Why cannot winnable games be art? I've frequently heard the term "poetry in motion" applied to sports people. Prior to Duchamp, found art was not art. How about conceptual art? Was that art a hundred years ago? Art is a moving target and in some cases it is perfectly reasonable for a piece to be art for one group of people but not for another group. A personal piece fro the artist to a friend for instance.
The blanket assertion that anything winnable cannot be art fails due its breadth.
2. He is using the term "game" in two different ways so that there is a generalised "Computer Game" inclusive of immersive games, and then the subset of games which excludes imersive games which then become representations of Films, novels etc.
Here he shows the flaw in his argument by effectively claiming that anything that can be considered art cannot be a game and anything he considers a game cannot be art.
He has decided the result before a ball has been kicked:-)
The human brain is quite remarkable in its ability to justify its own actions to itself.
"Group think" plays its part in situations like this, "all the other guys are doing it so it must be ok".
How somebody responds to authority can also be important. "My boss said it's perfectly legal".
And finally you may have the "Lets give Henry Kissenger the Nobel Peace Prize" type of meme coming in from families or friends. "You are really good to you sick mother you're a very nice person".
With enough reinforment in various forms you can get people to do pretty much anything
Companies have to act to protect their trademarks or they may lose them, it is known as genericization. Ironically, Google has this problem with people using the term "Googling"
"The word Kleenex is now commonly used to describe any soft facial tissue. However, Kleenex is the trademarked name of the soft facial tissue manufactured and sold by the Kimberly-Clark Corporation."
It is now clear that it is perfectly legal for me to use a competitors name as a search term as long as I don't (for example) make my website look like my competitors.
I'm no Apple fanboy but I have (and occasionally still do) used it (v4) on Windows and it works at least well as any other browser. Certainly better than IE. Probably more conforming in the UI dept than Chrome. And most installers carry a pile of garbage unless you deselect it.
Safari? Bad? In what way?
It can render the Acid 3 test (100%). Firefox gets (92%) at present but does have a truck load of plugins.
After that it comes down to what you like.
There is lots of bandwidth around, the problem is getting it to people. Until the last mile problem is tackled in a more robust manner, teh backbone could have infinite speed and I'd hardly be able to tell the difference. (Northern Scotland Office 0.5Mbit/sec Home 4Mbit/sec)
Who will use it? I'm sure that there will be somebody who develops the next big thing with it and hypes it to the stratosphere.
I'm constantly amazed by what catches on on the web (Twitter? FourSquare? Go figure)
Needless to say I never invest in web companies.
Code should be release, but this should not be confused with replicating scientific results. ]
If you want to replicate research, you need to write your own code according to the methods described in the research. your answer then needs to match the original to test the code.
Slashdot Mirror
Arrhenius predicted warming due to CO2 in 1896
Since 1975 global temperatures have risen 0.6C and CO2 concentration has gone from 335ppm to 390ppm. The results in the paper don't match reality.
http://www.costaricanmarket.com/dococorimero.html
Get real, MP's vote for their manifesto and act to further their political careers. They will help with issues that don't conflict with those two aims. That won't change, no matter how many emails you send. And not being ignored doesn't mean I got the result I wanted in all cases. I'm no th eonly person in the constituency and there are conflicting issues. In those cases you have to get involved and campaign to change the political landscape and again simply filling an inbox with emails will not do that.
As to your point about noticing them in a group, how do you know that a personal approach would not have worked much better, my dealing with my MPs (Charles Kennedy and then Danny Alexander) have always yielded good results within a few days. I've never been ignored.
You fill out the form once and the lobby firm sends repeated emails. "you have to ask why voters are having to do this to be noticed". Voters don't have to do this, it just seems an easy way to have influence. But real influence takes time and work. This MP was interviewed last night with a representative of the lobby group. The lobbiest had polled his members in the MP's constituency and the majority wanted the group to keep emailing the MP. So the (majority of) 400 members (read self selected) of the group in that constituency want to flood the MP's inbox at the expense of the 50,000 other voters in the contituency who comunicate directly. If I was the MP I would have just routed the emails to the deleted items folder
If you actually care about your politics or campaign, then write to your MP direct. Simply filling in a form and spamming MP's simply stops the people who do care from communicating with their MP. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, we should just have an arms race between different lobby groups who would automatically send every MP a million emails a day just to show how much we care about an issue.
Yes, I tend to agree. Otherwise a proprietary application running on GNU/linux would have to be GPL'ed as soon as it supplies a callback function to the OS.
http://wordpress.org/news/2009/07/themes-are-gpl-too/
I think that this is part of the ELF code. See analysis here: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20040722135616439
If I remember correctly, things may have changed, C++ is supposed to be implemented as a precompiler for C. Which means that for a new system you need only need to transfer the precompiled output (C) and then put it through a bootstrap C compiler on the new system. As I say things may have changed.
I seem to remember that this is the kind of size for a first human study. I guess this is to make sure that the patients didn't die / develop cancer / turn into zombies. The more detailed studies will happen, but I think when you get to the human trial stage, the ethical considerations suggest a small group.
"One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. Santiago might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them."
There are a couple of major problems with this paragraph.
1. The is an implied assuption that if you can win at something then it cannot be art, an assuption that he provides no evidence for. Why cannot winnable games be art? I've frequently heard the term "poetry in motion" applied to sports people. Prior to Duchamp, found art was not art. How about conceptual art? Was that art a hundred years ago? Art is a moving target and in some cases it is perfectly reasonable for a piece to be art for one group of people but not for another group. A personal piece fro the artist to a friend for instance.
The blanket assertion that anything winnable cannot be art fails due its breadth.
2. He is using the term "game" in two different ways so that there is a generalised "Computer Game" inclusive of immersive games, and then the subset of games which excludes imersive games which then become representations of Films, novels etc.
Here he shows the flaw in his argument by effectively claiming that anything that can be considered art cannot be a game and anything he considers a game cannot be art.
He has decided the result before a ball has been kicked:-)
Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously. Is this a Chomsky reference?
The human brain is quite remarkable in its ability to justify its own actions to itself. "Group think" plays its part in situations like this, "all the other guys are doing it so it must be ok". How somebody responds to authority can also be important. "My boss said it's perfectly legal". And finally you may have the "Lets give Henry Kissenger the Nobel Peace Prize" type of meme coming in from families or friends. "You are really good to you sick mother you're a very nice person". With enough reinforment in various forms you can get people to do pretty much anything
Companies have to act to protect their trademarks or they may lose them, it is known as genericization. Ironically, Google has this problem with people using the term "Googling"
http://inventors.about.com/b/2006/01/29/when-a-brand-name-becomes-generic-genericized-trademarks.htm
"The word Kleenex is now commonly used to describe any soft facial tissue. However, Kleenex is the trademarked name of the soft facial tissue manufactured and sold by the Kimberly-Clark Corporation."
This is already covered in law (in the UK anyway, but I think elsewhere as well) under "Passing Off".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_off
It is now clear that it is perfectly legal for me to use a competitors name as a search term as long as I don't (for example) make my website look like my competitors.
I'm no Apple fanboy but I have (and occasionally still do) used it (v4) on Windows and it works at least well as any other browser. Certainly better than IE. Probably more conforming in the UI dept than Chrome. And most installers carry a pile of garbage unless you deselect it.
Safari? Bad? In what way? It can render the Acid 3 test (100%). Firefox gets (92%) at present but does have a truck load of plugins. After that it comes down to what you like.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/
Works for me. I sometimes want to check how a new processor compares to my existing one, if it isn't ten times quicker I wait a while.
There is lots of bandwidth around, the problem is getting it to people. Until the last mile problem is tackled in a more robust manner, teh backbone could have infinite speed and I'd hardly be able to tell the difference. (Northern Scotland Office 0.5Mbit/sec Home 4Mbit/sec)
Who will use it? I'm sure that there will be somebody who develops the next big thing with it and hypes it to the stratosphere. I'm constantly amazed by what catches on on the web (Twitter? FourSquare? Go figure) Needless to say I never invest in web companies.
http://xkcd.com/378/ So problem solved.
then everybody would get eaten by ducks?
Code should be release, but this should not be confused with replicating scientific results. ] If you want to replicate research, you need to write your own code according to the methods described in the research. your answer then needs to match the original to test the code.