Converting to EPS is typically a problem when converting from the tools I find in front of me at work. E.G. Visio. Visio is bloody great for technical diagrams. Nothing comes close. But the EPS output looks like it's been through a 4-year-old-crayon-drawing filter. They have no incentive to make it easy to move away from "insert object->visio".
My document writing productivity would drop to 10% of what it is today if I had to draw arrowheads to scale in Inkscape rather than use my smartshape templates in Visio. The benefits of form/content separation, automated typesetting and easy text-file source code management do not compensate for the drawing tools integration and the lack thereof.
I can use Tex and LaTex. I appreciate the benefits compared to say Word or openoffice but when it comes to drawing the innards of chips I'm designing (like what I do on a daily basis), the fluidity of drawing is the most important issue. Every three or four years, I run this one up the pole to see if I can get by with LaTex and the related tools, but I fail. If I wrote math papers, it wouldn't be a problem, but I don't, I design chips.
TFA doesn't address the extreme crapitude of embedding pictures in Tex. I could drive myself to drink converting everything to EPS, or poorly scalable bitmaps before embedding them, but I don't want to.
The issues of imperfect typesetting are not the barrier to entry for potential TeX users. Picture embedding is.
Right, but this finding gives theoreticians something they can get to grips with in a much more tangible way than the hand-wavey incompatibility of QM and GR.
On reflection, I've only every seen "Two Thumbs Up!" reported. Presumably they aren't interested in mentioned the S&E review if it isn't two thumbs up.
As far as I know, he's primarily known in the United States. I had never heard of him while growing up in the UK.
He and partner pioneered the 'low information' form of review, that amounted to 3 states, where all reviews were members of the set {two thumbs down, 1 thumb up, 2 thumbs up}
Discretising is just quantising in the spacial domain!
First I've heard of it. 20 years of farting around with sampling systems and the associated DSP, I've never heard it called anything other than quantizing. Is this some alternate universe I've slipping into?
We've had whole industries of people exposed to higher than background RF since the second world war. Anyone with walkie talkies. Anyone working RF transmission equipment. Anyone working on radar. etc. These people have had time to get old and die by now. So there's been plenty of time for the signal to show up in the data. It hasn't.
Penis cancer was strongly related to a career in chimney cleaning and like mesothelioma, it takes a few decades to show up. The book 'The Emperor of Maladies' gives a good account of how major causes for both these diseases were identified. By the time the link was shown, chimney cleaning as an major industry was going away and the problem was fixing itself.
The rising rates of Alzheimers disease may be related to glutamates in the diet, but it's going to take some huge studies to show this to be true, even though the basic chemistry of how it occurs at the cell level is textbook stuff.
Since we generally don't start looking until the disease rates start going up, there's not a lot you can do beyond massive data collection and tracking today in the hopes that something pops up. That data collection is happening, but more for the purpose of selling you things that identifying disease causing behaviors.
>My ear gets hotter from wearing my headphones for an extended period. My ears burn when I listen to the conversations between my cube dwelling neighbors.
Right, but with both asbestos and smoking, the signal in the epidemiological data was huge and easily seen. Since the signal in the 'low level RF causing cancer' data is next to non-existent, any effect will at most be minor compared to other things (like diet for example).
The emerging data on various hormetic effects shows small effects, but consistently and repeatably shows them.
The strongest univariate association between eating any single food and cancer is for wheat. But apparently those of us who avoid 'healthy whole grains' are a bit loopy. People's ability to weigh risk is astonishingly bad.
Furthermore, there's a growing body of evidence that hormesis is vital for health and so a low level of exposure to radiation (ionizing and non ionizing), toxins and harmful biological entities in the environment is a good thing that promotes health.
I second that. As a next step, I suggest Robuchon's "The Complete Robuchon" - it's a mixture of technique and actual recipes, showing basic preparations for all kinds of meats and produce. French tradition at its finest, in particular the potato chapter.
My and my wife ate a 16 course tasting menu at Joel Robuchon's restaurant in Vegas. $700 per head. Best meal of my life and cheaper than blackjack. The man knows how to cook.
Correctly combining the egg foam and almond in a French Macaron is certainly something requiring learned dexterity and much swearing while learning it.
Slashdot Mirror
If they would add visio style smartshapes to Inkscape, but use python instead of visual basic, I would get a sex change and have their babies.
Converting to EPS is typically a problem when converting from the tools I find in front of me at work. E.G. Visio. Visio is bloody great for technical diagrams. Nothing comes close. But the EPS output looks like it's been through a 4-year-old-crayon-drawing filter. They have no incentive to make it easy to move away from "insert object->visio".
My document writing productivity would drop to 10% of what it is today if I had to draw arrowheads to scale in Inkscape rather than use my smartshape templates in Visio. The benefits of form/content separation, automated typesetting and easy text-file source code management do not compensate for the drawing tools integration and the lack thereof.
I can use Tex and LaTex. I appreciate the benefits compared to say Word or openoffice but when it comes to drawing the innards of chips I'm designing (like what I do on a daily basis), the fluidity of drawing is the most important issue. Every three or four years, I run this one up the pole to see if I can get by with LaTex and the related tools, but I fail. If I wrote math papers, it wouldn't be a problem, but I don't, I design chips.
TFA doesn't address the extreme crapitude of embedding pictures in Tex. I could drive myself to drink converting everything to EPS, or poorly scalable bitmaps before embedding them, but I don't want to.
The issues of imperfect typesetting are not the barrier to entry for potential TeX users. Picture embedding is.
Right, but this finding gives theoreticians something they can get to grips with in a much more tangible way than the hand-wavey incompatibility of QM and GR.
The smart money is no-firewall and complimentarity is bunkum.
But I'm not smart, Polchinski is.
On reflection, I've only every seen "Two Thumbs Up!" reported. Presumably they aren't interested in mentioned the S&E review if it isn't two thumbs up.
True. But I've never seen it reported that way.
As far as I know, he's primarily known in the United States.
I had never heard of him while growing up in the UK.
He and partner pioneered the 'low information' form of review, that amounted to 3 states, where all reviews were members of the set {two thumbs down, 1 thumb up, 2 thumbs up}
That's all I know on this topic.
Later in life he looked like Finbarr Saunders..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2010/aug/19/wankh-awards-rude-titles
I am discriminated against. I do not have paranormal abilities.
Actually I morphed from a computer science guy to a DSP guy to a crypto guy over my career.
but with phosphorescence they get stuck in metastable states
So be sure to put at least two d-flops on the output of the phosphorescent material in the clock domain of the viewer.
Foveon is a loser in the market because it doesn't perform.
Er.. And it costs more.
Discretising is just quantising in the spacial domain!
First I've heard of it. 20 years of farting around with sampling systems and the associated DSP, I've never heard it called anything other than quantizing. Is this some alternate universe I've slipping into?
We've had whole industries of people exposed to higher than background RF since the second world war. Anyone with walkie talkies. Anyone working RF transmission equipment. Anyone working on radar. etc. These people have had time to get old and die by now. So there's been plenty of time for the signal to show up in the data. It hasn't.
Penis cancer was strongly related to a career in chimney cleaning and like mesothelioma, it takes a few decades to show up. The book 'The Emperor of Maladies' gives a good account of how major causes for both these diseases were identified. By the time the link was shown, chimney cleaning as an major industry was going away and the problem was fixing itself.
The rising rates of Alzheimers disease may be related to glutamates in the diet, but it's going to take some huge studies to show this to be true, even though the basic chemistry of how it occurs at the cell level is textbook stuff.
Since we generally don't start looking until the disease rates start going up, there's not a lot you can do beyond massive data collection and tracking today in the hopes that something pops up. That data collection is happening, but more for the purpose of selling you things that identifying disease causing behaviors.
>My ear gets hotter from wearing my headphones for an extended period.
My ears burn when I listen to the conversations between my cube dwelling neighbors.
Right, but with both asbestos and smoking, the signal in the epidemiological data was huge and easily seen. Since the signal in the 'low level RF causing cancer' data is next to non-existent, any effect will at most be minor compared to other things (like diet for example).
The emerging data on various hormetic effects shows small effects, but consistently and repeatably shows them.
The strongest univariate association between eating any single food and cancer is for wheat. But apparently those of us who avoid 'healthy whole grains' are a bit loopy. People's ability to weigh risk is astonishingly bad.
Furthermore, there's a growing body of evidence that hormesis is vital for health and so a low level of exposure to radiation (ionizing and non ionizing), toxins and harmful biological entities in the environment is a good thing that promotes health.
Some fun links because I'm too lazy to find proper citations on a Saturday morning..
http://blog.sethroberts.net/2012/04/01/moderate-alcohol-consumption-associated-with-less-cirrhosis/
http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller12.html
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/tiny-amounts-of-ethanol-dramatically-221986.aspx
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/news-releases/2011/12/20/low-dose-radiation/
If there was a significant effect it would have shown up in the various massive epidemiological studies.
The FCC 'advice' is based on supposition, not science.
It goes like this.
A -> B (RF causes local heating)
B -> C (Local heating causes disease)
So A -> C (RF causes disease)
But A -> C was shown not to be true, and B -> C has never been established, but given the A->C thing, is almost certainly not true.
If they want to save lives, they would have more success banning base jumping from radio towers.
I second that. As a next step, I suggest Robuchon's "The Complete Robuchon" - it's a mixture of technique and actual recipes, showing basic preparations for all kinds of meats and produce. French tradition at its finest, in particular the potato chapter.
My and my wife ate a 16 course tasting menu at Joel Robuchon's restaurant in Vegas. $700 per head. Best meal of my life and cheaper than blackjack. The man knows how to cook.
Chicken feet make great stock.
Correctly combining the egg foam and almond in a French Macaron is certainly something requiring learned dexterity and much swearing while learning it.
Remember to get the metal knob. Melting the plastic one when making bread does not a happy home cook make.
http://www.amazon.com/Le-Creuset-Stainless-Medium-Replacement/dp/B006MVYE44/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363990411&sr=8-1&keywords=metal+knob+le+creuset
I assume he meant enameled cast iron, like La Creuset. I would love to know where he found one for $60.
I got one for $50 at Ross. It had a 'seconds' sticker on it, but it works fine.
My other one came from the Le Creuset store cost four times as much.