Since Emily seems to be quite mathmatically inclined, I'm sure she could explain to you why data on entire population can never be applied to a single person. Likewise, I could list dozens of women I know who are terrible at math, but that would also be completely irrelevant to this whole matter.
The US Presidential election is over, now we see the following:
I'm not going to get into a debate on the veracity of your statements, but none of the claims you listed are post-election news. The economy and Iraq both received very extensive news coverage before the election so I'm not quite sure what your point is.
I'm not disputing that innocent people are convicted. I just don't think it it happens "quite often".
Your first link points to a study of 360 people who were wrongly convicted. This study goes all the way back to 1896. This study may not be exhaustive, but it certainly doesn't appear too many people are wrongly convicted when compared with the huge number of trials every year. Also, with the improvement in DNA testing it's becoming even more unlikely that an innocent person will be found guilty.
I just think that if someone is going to claim (as the grandparent poster did) that a country's court system convicts innocent people "quite often", they should provide a bit of evidence to back it up.
...how much would it take to roll antartica north enough to melt the kilometers high ice on it?
I'd guess that it would take an earthquake so large that melting ice wouldn't be our primary concern. Really, how many miles north would Antarctica have to move for there to be significant melting? 100 miles? 200? 500? If a 9.0 quake only moved the North Pole a few centimeters, we're talking a pretty huge quake to move a whole continent hundreds of miles.
I believe "Penetrode" was Michael's derogatory name for Initrode. I don't think they were separate companies. This is a good excuse for me to watch the movie again and confirm.
I had one colleague who was impressed that I could divide £45 between seven people.
It depends on how many decimal places you calculated to. If you estimated it to be about 6 per person, I'm not too impressed. If you went to two digits (6.42) that's pretty good. Of course, if you had to use pencil and paper, then I'm not impressed at all.;)
Now I pick up a ruler and put it against the pencil.
This is where the problem lies. What you're doing doesn't make any sense. You're using a ruler to count a discrete value: the number of pens and pencils.
Counting votes is like counting pens and pencils. There are differences between the counts because errors can occur. Once a recount is requested, there's much more scrutiny and the vast majority of counting errors are eliminated.
You've stated that you believe we can accurately count three votes (2 pens and a pencil). What about 30? 300? 300,000? At what point can we no longer get an accurate count? What if we broke the votes into smaller groups? Can we count 100 groups of 300 without errors?
Being aware of error is important, but that doesn't mean we can't accurately count votes.
Yes, I would be upset if a cell phone caused my mom's hair to catch on fire. That doesn't mean that I'm worried that such a thing will occur. I always find it absurd when people talk about "even one defect" or "just one death" being "one too many" without putting the matter into context.
If we're talking about 170 million cellphones, 83 defects certainly aren't unreasonable. I also believe that a drug that was used by 170 million people wouldn't be unsafe if caused 83 deaths. Would I be upset if this drug killed my mother? Of course! That doesn't mean I wouldn't take it though (assuming it served some medical purpose).
It's true that there wouldn't be the "battleground states" as they now exist. However, states that are now locks for candidates (MA for Kerry, TX for Bush) could encounter fighting over that one electoral vote. All 50 states would be subject to these disputes.
The fact that Moore didn't say anything that wasn't true only means he wasn't lying outright.
What was Moore's central point of that segment?
1. Rep. Goss does not provide a free number to complain about the USA PATRIOT act. or 2. Rep. Goss provides a free number, but it lacks the 800 area code.
Moore's tactics in this segment are virtually the defintion of deception.
Now, the way he presented them was his own spin on the 'truth'.
There's spin and there's deception.
If I say "John Smith has not beat his wife in the past eight months" it implies that at some point in the past he abused her. The statement may be true, but very deceptive. Moore used the same tactics in Fahrenheir 9/11.
For example, Moore claims that Rep. Porter Goss doesn't have an 800 number that people can use to report problems with the USA PATRIOT act. An ordinary phone number (area code 202) flashes on the screen. However, Rep. Goss does have a toll-free number for USA PATRIOT act. It's (877) 858-9040. Moore was technically correct when he stated there wasn't an 800 number, but this tactic couldn't be considered anything but deception.
Slashdot Mirror
Keep in mind that this list was in Mobile PC magazine.
Wifi access != fire or police services
Gmail took free web mail and turned it into a legitimate and attractive service
Is Gmail a pay service? Is it even out of beta?
Since Emily seems to be quite mathmatically inclined, I'm sure she could explain to you why data on entire population can never be applied to a single person. Likewise, I could list dozens of women I know who are terrible at math, but that would also be completely irrelevant to this whole matter.
The US Presidential election is over, now we see the following:
I'm not going to get into a debate on the veracity of your statements, but none of the claims you listed are post-election news. The economy and Iraq both received very extensive news coverage before the election so I'm not quite sure what your point is.
I'm not disputing that innocent people are convicted. I just don't think it it happens "quite often".
Your first link points to a study of 360 people who were wrongly convicted. This study goes all the way back to 1896. This study may not be exhaustive, but it certainly doesn't appear too many people are wrongly convicted when compared with the huge number of trials every year. Also, with the improvement in DNA testing it's becoming even more unlikely that an innocent person will be found guilty.
I just think that if someone is going to claim (as the grandparent poster did) that a country's court system convicts innocent people "quite often", they should provide a bit of evidence to back it up.
Trials here in the good ole US of A seem to pick the wrong guy quite often.
Any evidence or sources to back that statement up or did you pretty much pull that from your rear?
...how much would it take to roll antartica north enough to melt the kilometers high ice on it?
I'd guess that it would take an earthquake so large that melting ice wouldn't be our primary concern. Really, how many miles north would Antarctica have to move for there to be significant melting? 100 miles? 200? 500? If a 9.0 quake only moved the North Pole a few centimeters, we're talking a pretty huge quake to move a whole continent hundreds of miles.
I believe "Penetrode" was Michael's derogatory name for Initrode. I don't think they were separate companies. This is a good excuse for me to watch the movie again and confirm.
Coincidentally, these are also the odds of the average /.er getting laid by the year 2029
/.er getting laid by 2029".
I think you meant "these are also the odds of any
I had one colleague who was impressed that I could divide £45 between seven people.
;)
It depends on how many decimal places you calculated to. If you estimated it to be about 6 per person, I'm not too impressed. If you went to two digits (6.42) that's pretty good. Of course, if you had to use pencil and paper, then I'm not impressed at all.
Will do!
Cheers!
Mystery: I almost never have house guests.
...if I did have house guests, any of them who didn't like it would be more than welcome to fuck off.
Mystery solved:
You must be very opposed to pressing buttons.
1st problem: Press the previous chapter button.
2nd problem: Press the mute button on your TV/receiver remote.
Doubtful. There won't be a market for DVD player upgrades because the upgrades couldn't cost much less than a brand new HD-DVD player
Now I pick up a ruler and put it against the pencil.
This is where the problem lies. What you're doing doesn't make any sense. You're using a ruler to count a discrete value: the number of pens and pencils.
Counting votes is like counting pens and pencils. There are differences between the counts because errors can occur. Once a recount is requested, there's much more scrutiny and the vast majority of counting errors are eliminated.
You've stated that you believe we can accurately count three votes (2 pens and a pencil). What about 30? 300? 300,000? At what point can we no longer get an accurate count? What if we broke the votes into smaller groups? Can we count 100 groups of 300 without errors?
Being aware of error is important, but that doesn't mean we can't accurately count votes.
Until your mom's hair catches fire.
Yes, I would be upset if a cell phone caused my mom's hair to catch on fire. That doesn't mean that I'm worried that such a thing will occur. I always find it absurd when people talk about "even one defect" or "just one death" being "one too many" without putting the matter into context.
If we're talking about 170 million cellphones, 83 defects certainly aren't unreasonable. I also believe that a drug that was used by 170 million people wouldn't be unsafe if caused 83 deaths. Would I be upset if this drug killed my mother? Of course! That doesn't mean I wouldn't take it though (assuming it served some medical purpose).
I believe the access points will be physically attached to traffic and street lights, not tied into those networks.
Quick response:
- 250 fps average would mean that even under heavy load the frame rate would be acceptable.
- When new cards are released, older cards generally drop in price.
- TV runs at 30 fps (actually it's something like 29.97), not 25.
On the other hand Extremetech's review find the PCIe version much faster
Not true. Extremetech concludes "You can get nearly all of the 6600 GT goodness in an AGP package, and leave very little on the table."
It's true that there wouldn't be the "battleground states" as they now exist. However, states that are now locks for candidates (MA for Kerry, TX for Bush) could encounter fighting over that one electoral vote. All 50 states would be subject to these disputes.
There is more to the world than Kerry==white && Bush==black
Quite true...Kerry has looked rather orange lately.
There is a difference between 5 degree change over 100,000 years and 5 degree change of 10 years.
Ummm, Mr. AC, I really hope you don't consider 10 years of data to represent a global warming trend.
The fact that Moore didn't say anything that wasn't true only means he wasn't lying outright.
What was Moore's central point of that segment?
1. Rep. Goss does not provide a free number to complain about the USA PATRIOT act.
or
2. Rep. Goss provides a free number, but it lacks the 800 area code.
Moore's tactics in this segment are virtually the defintion of deception.
Now, the way he presented them was his own spin on the 'truth'.
There's spin and there's deception.
If I say "John Smith has not beat his wife in the past eight months" it implies that at some point in the past he abused her. The statement may be true, but very deceptive. Moore used the same tactics in Fahrenheir 9/11.
For example, Moore claims that Rep. Porter Goss doesn't have an 800 number that people can use to report problems with the USA PATRIOT act. An ordinary phone number (area code 202) flashes on the screen. However, Rep. Goss does have a toll-free number for USA PATRIOT act. It's (877) 858-9040. Moore was technically correct when he stated there wasn't an 800 number, but this tactic couldn't be considered anything but deception.