While the new drugs are often less effective when compared to themselves, they are usually similarly or more effective when on top of the standard of care. For example, what tends to happen is that in the old studies with diuretics people had a systolic blood pressure going in of 200 mm Hg. Now, people are already on those diuretics and have a systolic blood pressure going in of 150 mm Hg. Given the same drug as a comparison, you often see that either the new drug is better in efficacy or similar in efficacy and better in safety.
You should check out some of the newer versions of Octave. The graphics in versions 3.0 and 3.2 are very much improved. (Disclosure: I was an active Octave developer a couple of years ago.)
My best experience in managing a moderate sized company was ~400 users where 80-90% of them had thin terminals and only needed about 10 apps. The terminal cost ~$300 each and the maintenance on the terminal was almost nil. If one wasn't working, a local "expert user" put it into a "broken" box and we would take it, reflash it, and if it still didn't work it was replaced. ~2%/yr broke (one every other month).
In my experience, it's a function of how well you're doing your job and how locked down you can make the users' systems. If you do your job well and can effectively totally lock down the system (users install nothing, use Citrix, etc, and are only allowed to use a limited number of apps), that can be perfectly reasonable.
But, the design delays when you would have to buy more disk space. The problem you're referring to is a problem to a specific disk usage scenario. Not all problems are the same, and if you're planning to mass-edit identical files that are a) large enough to make a meaningful impact on your disk usage and b) being edited in a non-uniform way, then don't use the de-duplication feature or plan ahead.
It is not monetary value it's scientific value. Generally the scientist who is has the rights to the telescope time (or who has helped design or run the mission, etc.) has rights to the data for a limited time (I think it's 6 months). After that time the images are released for the (scientific) general public. The difference here is that it's put into a form that the really general public can access the materials.
No reason for paranoia in this case that I'm aware of.
Yeah, but all that theory can't be put to any practical use without at least one general-purpose programming language under your belt. I've heard about programs that are all about theory, and don't even have a single practical course.
I would guess that if a student isn't doing something in their spare time that involves programming and therefore doesn't have the practical experience, they're not interested enough in the subject. The good computer scientists that I know do it for the fun of it. They will work on interesting problems and solve those.
If they know the theory and are not doing the practice themselves for fun, why did they choose CS to begin with?
This seems like a common question. There will be plenty of people who think that college should provide vocational training and plenty more who think that college should teach you "how to think independently".
I'm personally more in the second camp. I think that there are vocational schools for those who want to learn the vocation, but those skills will need to be constantly updated. I think that what you learn in college (as opposed to vocational schools) should be applicable to more fields than just the one that you learn and that you should be able to apply the lessons beyond what the curriculum specifically teaches.
Essentially, if you want to learn the theory of how databases work and know how to write a database you're taking the right sort of classes. If you're wanting to become a DBA, you should really go to a vocational school.
They never said that they disabled it via cable. They require you to buy a cable or buy service. What Verizon disabled was the ability to move data with a transfer medium that you already may have like bluetooth or IR.
Does anyone know why this is not just part of GCC? It seems that with the current methodology of compiling from a language to the GCC middle language that essentially any supported compiled languages would gain from being part of GCC.
Here in Philadelphia, when I was entering the polls, a man was sitting outside the polling place with a notecard that informed me how to vote right down the party line.
I was appalled. I personally think that on the ballot should only be the person's name (with running mates as applicable) and the position they're running for. Perhaps the names should be sorted alphabetically by last name or by some random lottery system, but people should have to know enough about who they're voting for to know that they want to vote for person X, not just what party line they want to vote.
Funny thing though - I don't remember ever having been asked if I wanted them to be like this. Because I know that if I had been asked - I don't believe I would allow them these rights. Unless all of us got the same rights. But then, the whole US would collapse if we all acted the same way our Congress and Senate acted.
Actually, you are asked every 2-4 years if you'd like for the system to be like this. It's called voting. Exercise your opinion in this way. If you don't like one of the two major candidates, vote for a minor candidate that you like-- even if the minor candidate doesn't get enough votes to win, the more votes that they get will make it easier for the next set of minor candidates.
Also, you have a chance to get your representatives, all the way up to president, to see it your way. Write a letter. Write a personalized letter to each of your representatives from your local city councilman to the president.
The author mentions using this to prevent wiki defacement. This could already be done with some javascript and it could be browser independent. Just add some javascript that would hash the message, some part of the URL or page, or a salt and that would be a required part of sending.
It would require javascript enabled (or with a logged in user, you could remove the hash requirement), but it could also provide a seamless integration without any real changes required for the user.
I've found that documents with significant complexity will always kill word. Make a document (by actually typing it) with over about 25 pages and a significant number of graphs and text formatting (headers, etc.) throw in some cross referencing and you've got a file that word will always eat.
Also, for excel if you try matrix operations on more than about 1000 cells it will give an incorrect answer then shortly later it will crash.
I also wonder if this is intended to give Windows more access to certain Scientific/Media computing markets which are dominated by *nix systems (industrial renderfarms, for instance).
One of the main reasons that windows isn't in the scientific/media computing arena is the high overhead. *nix can be installed on a box and only use very minimal processing and memory for the OS itself. Also, so much legacy code is written for *nix that people don't want to rewrite/debug that; it will take a while for the momentum to shift.
Slashdot Mirror
My favorite part of the article is the fact that it appears to be written by HP given the file:// link in the article.
While the new drugs are often less effective when compared to themselves, they are usually similarly or more effective when on top of the standard of care. For example, what tends to happen is that in the old studies with diuretics people had a systolic blood pressure going in of 200 mm Hg. Now, people are already on those diuretics and have a systolic blood pressure going in of 150 mm Hg. Given the same drug as a comparison, you often see that either the new drug is better in efficacy or similar in efficacy and better in safety.
You should check out some of the newer versions of Octave. The graphics in versions 3.0 and 3.2 are very much improved. (Disclosure: I was an active Octave developer a couple of years ago.)
My best experience in managing a moderate sized company was ~400 users where 80-90% of them had thin terminals and only needed about 10 apps. The terminal cost ~$300 each and the maintenance on the terminal was almost nil. If one wasn't working, a local "expert user" put it into a "broken" box and we would take it, reflash it, and if it still didn't work it was replaced. ~2%/yr broke (one every other month).
In my experience, it's a function of how well you're doing your job and how locked down you can make the users' systems. If you do your job well and can effectively totally lock down the system (users install nothing, use Citrix, etc, and are only allowed to use a limited number of apps), that can be perfectly reasonable.
But, the design delays when you would have to buy more disk space. The problem you're referring to is a problem to a specific disk usage scenario. Not all problems are the same, and if you're planning to mass-edit identical files that are a) large enough to make a meaningful impact on your disk usage and b) being edited in a non-uniform way, then don't use the de-duplication feature or plan ahead.
It is not monetary value it's scientific value. Generally the scientist who is has the rights to the telescope time (or who has helped design or run the mission, etc.) has rights to the data for a limited time (I think it's 6 months). After that time the images are released for the (scientific) general public. The difference here is that it's put into a form that the really general public can access the materials.
No reason for paranoia in this case that I'm aware of.
No, there are two classes of drivers other than me:
Everyone who drives faster than I do is an asshole. Everyone who drives slower than me is an idiot.
That means that only about 95% of drivers are idiots.
Yeah, but all that theory can't be put to any practical use without at least one general-purpose programming language under your belt. I've heard about programs that are all about theory, and don't even have a single practical course.
I would guess that if a student isn't doing something in their spare time that involves programming and therefore doesn't have the practical experience, they're not interested enough in the subject. The good computer scientists that I know do it for the fun of it. They will work on interesting problems and solve those.
If they know the theory and are not doing the practice themselves for fun, why did they choose CS to begin with?
This seems like a common question. There will be plenty of people who think that college should provide vocational training and plenty more who think that college should teach you "how to think independently".
I'm personally more in the second camp. I think that there are vocational schools for those who want to learn the vocation, but those skills will need to be constantly updated. I think that what you learn in college (as opposed to vocational schools) should be applicable to more fields than just the one that you learn and that you should be able to apply the lessons beyond what the curriculum specifically teaches.
Essentially, if you want to learn the theory of how databases work and know how to write a database you're taking the right sort of classes. If you're wanting to become a DBA, you should really go to a vocational school.
They never said that they disabled it via cable. They require you to buy a cable or buy service. What Verizon disabled was the ability to move data with a transfer medium that you already may have like bluetooth or IR.
Does anyone know why this is not just part of GCC? It seems that with the current methodology of compiling from a language to the GCC middle language that essentially any supported compiled languages would gain from being part of GCC.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.
At Georgia Tech, while the girls said that about the guys, I would say about the girls: "Good from afar, but far from good."
That's not the only formula he came up with. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PiFormulas.html
I thought I recalled an infinite fraction computation for pi by Ramanujan that was the most efficient, but I could be mis-remembering.
At least part of FOIA request costs must be paid for by the requester. It really doesn't cost the agency much.
Here in Philadelphia, when I was entering the polls, a man was sitting outside the polling place with a notecard that informed me how to vote right down the party line.
I was appalled. I personally think that on the ballot should only be the person's name (with running mates as applicable) and the position they're running for. Perhaps the names should be sorted alphabetically by last name or by some random lottery system, but people should have to know enough about who they're voting for to know that they want to vote for person X, not just what party line they want to vote.
Why did it take perl to do division?
Funny thing though - I don't remember ever having been asked if I wanted them to be like this. Because I know that if I had been asked - I don't believe I would allow them these rights. Unless all of us got the same rights. But then, the whole US would collapse if we all acted the same way our Congress and Senate acted.
Actually, you are asked every 2-4 years if you'd like for the system to be like this. It's called voting. Exercise your opinion in this way. If you don't like one of the two major candidates, vote for a minor candidate that you like-- even if the minor candidate doesn't get enough votes to win, the more votes that they get will make it easier for the next set of minor candidates.
Also, you have a chance to get your representatives, all the way up to president, to see it your way. Write a letter. Write a personalized letter to each of your representatives from your local city councilman to the president.
Unfortunately this means that each installation would need its own javascript function.
No it wouldn't. It could simply hash the title of the article, and some part of the URL, and some salt given by the server.
The author mentions using this to prevent wiki defacement. This could already be done with some javascript and it could be browser independent. Just add some javascript that would hash the message, some part of the URL or page, or a salt and that would be a required part of sending.
It would require javascript enabled (or with a logged in user, you could remove the hash requirement), but it could also provide a seamless integration without any real changes required for the user.
I wonder how many lapdancing clubs will be sent a takedown notice?/I
Most strip clubs are already adept at removing the material.
I've found that documents with significant complexity will always kill word. Make a document (by actually typing it) with over about 25 pages and a significant number of graphs and text formatting (headers, etc.) throw in some cross referencing and you've got a file that word will always eat.
Also, for excel if you try matrix operations on more than about 1000 cells it will give an incorrect answer then shortly later it will crash.
I also wonder if this is intended to give Windows more access to certain Scientific/Media computing markets which are dominated by *nix systems (industrial renderfarms, for instance).
One of the main reasons that windows isn't in the scientific/media computing arena is the high overhead. *nix can be installed on a box and only use very minimal processing and memory for the OS itself. Also, so much legacy code is written for *nix that people don't want to rewrite/debug that; it will take a while for the momentum to shift.
Just make it have an always completely transparent alpha channel-- make it go away.
SMT doesn't necessarily add 24%, that's the entire jump from Power4 to Power5. I'm guessing that SMT is not the only new feature.