I was internal to the project. I can assure you that comment on wikipedia is bollocks.
We used the hardware numbers (RX- or RM- something), and the code names (Rover, Lankku,...), we never used the intended/expected public code numbers, as they could change at any time. I have seen an n950 with "n9" stamped on the case, for example.
But Gerry Adams wasn't really an extremist, he was a useful idiot. Personally, I thought the actors voice-over was a pretty smart compromise. The freedom of the press was preserved, but the passion of the rhetoric was diffused.
It's the obvious "backward" step (and I don't mean that in a negative way, retreating from the dark alleyways MS has led U down is a good thing), but most of the people I know who actually liked U have moved sideways to Mint.
(As someone who's been on Debian for well over a decade, all I can say is "humbug!" to the lot of them, what with their fancy schmancy integrated desktop environments and wibbly-wobbly-window transitions, and crap like that.)
I believe this was written from a US perspective: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones I've not heard of any widespread rethinking when it comes to content delivery, so presume it still holds.
While the primary role of the "distributors" is to *restrict* the distribution of their product in every way possible, which most of the times it is, copyright-infringing methods will always be the most convenient ways of acquiring shows.
> An since bitcoins are not regulated by any government there are no safety nets in place to stop a bitcoin freefall. I don't even know if it can be stopped because of the way they work.
There is, and that's market forces. There is an eager crowd of 2nd-wave speculators desperately waiting for the crash, bitter that they missed the start of the first boom. Sure, it'll plummet, but the brakes will be slammed on pretty soon, I'm sure, as the greed kicks in. And then a slightly less explosive 2nd exponential curve upwards will begin. It might be fun to create a sweepstake for guessing the bottoming out price before it rallies. I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if it was 3 digits. Schadenfreude says I'd like to see it get a lot lower, just so that there are more people teetering on the ledges outside their windows. (You can probably tell I don't have any of these "I burnt electricity needlessly for greed" tokens.)
OK, I overlooked the "could". Those which have actually been exploited can be detected, as the emitted packets can be measured.
Alas the story doesn't link to an actual official statement from spamhaus, so it's impossible to see exactly what he said, there isn't even anything on spamhaus' own website, so is it an official spamhaus statement at all?
Perhaps, but is it any less enforceable than the FCC's RF emissions laws? Both are spewing crap into a finite broadcast medium, I think it's possible for the two to be considered almost analogues.
The problem with the compostable ones is that they aren't so good if you try to use them as a kitchen bin liner. I produce so little waste that once or twice the under-sink bin liner has started to decompose before I realise it's filling up.
Aside - you'll be pleased to know that as of just 2 days ago I decided thenceforth to use "literarily" to mean "expressed as one would find in literature, namely exagerated or fictionalised". To contrast against "literally", clearly;-)
Apparently, there were no "experiments", in the lab/contrivance sense - it was just a questionaire.
Regarding the failures: "Of the 13 effects under scrutiny in the latest investigation, one was only weakly supported, and two were not replicated at all. Both irreproducible effects involved social priming. In one of these, people had increased their endorsement of a current social system after being exposed to money[3]. In the other, Americans had espoused more-conservative values after seeing a US flag[4]."
[3] Caruso, E. M., Vohs, K. D., Baxter, B. & Waytz, A. J. Exp. Psych: Gen. 142, 301â€"306 (2013). [url was a redirect loop for me]
[4] Carter, T. J., Ferguson, M. J. & Hassin, R. R. Psych. Sci. 22, 1011â€"1018 (2011). http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/8/1011 """ A Single Exposure to the American Flag Shifts Support Toward Republicanism up to 8 Months Later
1. Travis J. Carter[1],
2. Melissa J. Ferguson[2] and
3. Ran R. Hassin[3]
1. Center for Decision Research, Booth School of Business, University of Chicago
2. Department of Psychology, Cornell University
3. Department of Psychology and The Center for the Study of Rationality, Hebrew University
Abstract
There is scant evidence that incidental cues in the environment significantly alter peopleâ€(TM)s political judgments and behavior in a durable way. We report that a brief exposure to the American flag led to a shift toward Republican beliefs, attitudes, and voting behavior among both Republican and Democratic participants, despite their overwhelming belief that exposure to the flag would not influence their behavior. In Experiment 1, which was conducted online during the 2008 U.S. presidential election, a single exposure to an American flag resulted in a significant increase in participantsâ€(TM) Republican voting intentions, voting behavior, political beliefs, and implicit and explicit attitudes, with some effects lasting 8 months after the exposure to the prime. In Experiment 2, we replicated the findings more than a year into the current Democratic presidential term. These results constitute the first evidence that nonconscious priming effects from exposure to a national flag can bias the citizenry toward one political party and can have considerable durability. """
Something passed through our hands here at the office recently. A "scientific" study, in the very soft field of human behaviour, where their sample size was 27. And that set was split into 4 groups. Absolutely any result from that experiment was possible and could be explained as pure random chance, not deviating from the null hypothesis.
Reading works like that, and others from the same authors and institutes, we got the feeling that it was mostly a delusion that they were doing science. Like how when a 4-year-old is given a tub of water, some washing up liquid, and various containers and vessels - there's a delusion that it's actually doing the washing up, and you really don't want to spoil its fun by breaking that illusion - it's not doing any harm, is it?
Would a burning hate of art museums, and the scheming of intricate plans to vandalise them, count as "developing interest in art museums"? That being what they measured an increase in.
Not sure what to read into this: "The Cronbachâ€(TM)s Alpha for the tolerance scale, however, falls short of conventional standards for reliably measuring the same underlying construct". It sounds like an admission that their methods are unreliable.
What tosh - it's not as if one of the authors' "areas of research interest include the effects of culturally enriching field trips to art museums", and therefore none of them were inclined to bias the findings.
Oh... http://www.uaedreform.org/jay-p-greene/
I'd also like to know where the 10 million of "private" funding come for that deparment came from, in case it provides even more nails...
Fortunately I've not really seen any relatives or loved ones suffer. I've got where I am from just thinking deeply and openly about what is an ancient taboo from various modern, and I like to think enlightened, perspectives. And by various, I mean quite varied - even Asimov's three laws of robotics support euthenasia - if my state is worsening, then inaction (not killing me) will cause a human being to come to harm (worsen).
"Heroin and handgliding" will (hopefully) be the final I hobby I take up.
Slashdot Mirror
I was internal to the project. I can assure you that comment on wikipedia is bollocks.
...), we never used the intended/expected public code numbers, as they could change at any time. I have seen an n950 with "n9" stamped on the case, for example.
We used the hardware numbers (RX- or RM- something), and the code names (Rover, Lankku,
Here, have my 12c for this year.
...
Of course, it will get derailed by administration, cancelled, resurrected, countractors default, go vastly over budget, etc., etc,
But Gerry Adams wasn't really an extremist, he was a useful idiot.
Personally, I thought the actors voice-over was a pretty smart compromise. The freedom of the press was preserved, but the passion of the rhetoric was diffused.
> Honesty is no longer treasured.
Not since biblical times, where we were shown that cooking the books was a good thing:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16&version=NET
No, no, no, no, not at all, far from it. We^H^HThey are almost certainly an insignificant minority, who can't really influence anything.
"culturally enriching" is not a neutral term - that's clear bias.
It's the obvious "backward" step (and I don't mean that in a negative way, retreating from the dark alleyways MS has led U down is a good thing), but most of the people I know who actually liked U have moved sideways to Mint.
(As someone who's been on Debian for well over a decade, all I can say is "humbug!" to the lot of them, what with their fancy schmancy integrated desktop environments and wibbly-wobbly-window transitions, and crap like that.)
I believe this was written from a US perspective:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones
I've not heard of any widespread rethinking when it comes to content delivery, so presume it still holds.
While the primary role of the "distributors" is to *restrict* the distribution of their product in every way possible, which most of the times it is, copyright-infringing methods will always be the most convenient ways of acquiring shows.
> An since bitcoins are not regulated by any government there are no safety nets in place to stop a bitcoin freefall. I don't even know if it can be stopped because of the way they work.
There is, and that's market forces. There is an eager crowd of 2nd-wave speculators desperately waiting for the crash, bitter that they missed the start of the first boom. Sure, it'll plummet, but the brakes will be slammed on pretty soon, I'm sure, as the greed kicks in. And then a slightly less explosive 2nd exponential curve upwards will begin. It might be fun to create a sweepstake for guessing the bottoming out price before it rallies. I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if it was 3 digits. Schadenfreude says I'd like to see it get a lot lower, just so that there are more people teetering on the ledges outside their windows. (You can probably tell I don't have any of these "I burnt electricity needlessly for greed" tokens.)
And this being the grocery stores' problem is an even vaguely accurate representation of what I wrote how?
OK, I overlooked the "could". Those which have actually been exploited can be detected, as the emitted packets can be measured.
Alas the story doesn't link to an actual official statement from spamhaus, so it's impossible to see exactly what he said, there isn't even anything on spamhaus' own website, so is it an official spamhaus statement at all?
Surely the n9000 communicator was the real state of the art? The 8110 was a piece of crap in comparison.
Perhaps, but is it any less enforceable than the FCC's RF emissions laws? Both are spewing crap into a finite broadcast medium, I think it's possible for the two to be considered almost analogues.
The problem with the compostable ones is that they aren't so good if you try to use them as a kitchen bin liner. I produce so little waste that once or twice the under-sink bin liner has started to decompose before I realise it's filling up.
I have plenty of spare lances.
;-)
Aside - you'll be pleased to know that as of just 2 days ago I decided thenceforth to use "literarily" to mean "expressed as one would find in literature, namely exagerated or fictionalised". To contrast against "literally", clearly
Apparently, there were no "experiments", in the lab/contrivance sense - it was just a questionaire.
Regarding the failures:
"Of the 13 effects under scrutiny in the latest investigation, one was only weakly supported, and two were not replicated at all. Both irreproducible effects involved social priming. In one of these, people had increased their endorsement of a current social system after being exposed to money[3]. In the other, Americans had espoused more-conservative values after seeing a US flag[4]."
[3] Caruso, E. M., Vohs, K. D., Baxter, B. & Waytz, A. J. Exp. Psych: Gen. 142, 301â€"306 (2013).
[url was a redirect loop for me]
[4] Carter, T. J., Ferguson, M. J. & Hassin, R. R. Psych. Sci. 22, 1011â€"1018 (2011).
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/8/1011
"""
A Single Exposure to the American Flag Shifts Support Toward Republicanism up to 8 Months Later
1. Travis J. Carter[1],
2. Melissa J. Ferguson[2] and
3. Ran R. Hassin[3]
1. Center for Decision Research, Booth School of Business, University of Chicago
2. Department of Psychology, Cornell University
3. Department of Psychology and The Center for the Study of Rationality, Hebrew University
Abstract
There is scant evidence that incidental cues in the environment significantly alter peopleâ€(TM)s political judgments and behavior in a durable way. We report that a brief exposure to the American flag led to a shift toward Republican beliefs, attitudes, and voting behavior among both Republican and Democratic participants, despite their overwhelming belief that exposure to the flag would not influence their behavior. In Experiment 1, which was conducted online during the 2008 U.S. presidential election, a single exposure to an American flag resulted in a significant increase in participantsâ€(TM) Republican voting intentions, voting behavior, political beliefs, and implicit and explicit attitudes, with some effects lasting 8 months after the exposure to the prime. In Experiment 2, we replicated the findings more than a year into the current Democratic presidential term. These results constitute the first evidence that nonconscious priming effects from exposure to a national flag can bias the citizenry toward one political party and can have considerable durability.
"""
Something passed through our hands here at the office recently. A "scientific" study, in the very soft field of human behaviour, where their sample size was 27. And that set was split into 4 groups. Absolutely any result from that experiment was possible and could be explained as pure random chance, not deviating from the null hypothesis.
Reading works like that, and others from the same authors and institutes, we got the feeling that it was mostly a delusion that they were doing science. Like how when a 4-year-old is given a tub of water, some washing up liquid, and various containers and vessels - there's a delusion that it's actually doing the washing up, and you really don't want to spoil its fun by breaking that illusion - it's not doing any harm, is it?
That 20% failed to be reproduceable is just as worrying.,
Would a burning hate of art museums, and the scheming of intricate plans to vandalise them, count as "developing interest in art museums"? That being what they measured an increase in.
Not sure what to read into this: "The Cronbachâ€(TM)s Alpha for the tolerance scale, however, falls short of conventional standards for reliably measuring the same underlying construct". It sounds like an admission that their methods are unreliable.
What tosh - it's not as if one of the authors' "areas of research interest include the effects of culturally enriching field trips to art museums", and therefore none of them were inclined to bias the findings.
Oh... http://www.uaedreform.org/jay-p-greene/
I'd also like to know where the 10 million of "private" funding come for that deparment came from, in case it provides even more nails...
With Whitman, et al.? Basking under the Maui sun?
Did you know that the book version (1982) ends with a plane crashing into the tower?
Despite the fact that the cgroups maintainer have openly admitted that cgoups is now (as of mid-september, at least) a completely illogical mess?
We need fewer clients for cgoups, not more, so that it can be killed with fire.
If they're really "warring", then the Geneva Conventions provides them with many rights that they're not getting in gitmo.
Fortunately I've not really seen any relatives or loved ones suffer. I've got where I am from just thinking deeply and openly about what is an ancient taboo from various modern, and I like to think enlightened, perspectives. And by various, I mean quite varied - even Asimov's three laws of robotics support euthenasia - if my state is worsening, then inaction (not killing me) will cause a human being to come to harm (worsen).
"Heroin and handgliding" will (hopefully) be the final I hobby I take up.
> In that situation, I'll kill my wife or she will kill me. Otherwise I wouldn't have married her.
That is more powerful than any "I love you" I've ever seen exchanged between any couple I've ever known. More "loving" too to be honest.