I've done that, but following its recommendations didn't help much. Is there any sort of magic checklist for how to make use of its information, other than following the recommendations given by the program?
I've often wondered whether differential calorie consumption by the brain is responsible for differences in obesity? Do the brains of less intelligent people (or people who prefer intellectually-passive activities) consume less energy and thus make their owners more likely to gain weight?
Maybe there is something to this "fat, slow, and stupid" stereotype.
This sounds like a stereotype, but it's really not.
I was recently in China for a conference. I'm a little guy (5'9" 145#) by US standards, but I was pretty big compared to the Chinese. I get on a plane back to the States, and was sort of shocked to see fat people again after not having seen many at all for two weeks. Upon returning I go to see my family in Alabama, with a connection in Denver.
The Tucson to Denver flight had some overweight people on it, but not too many... but as soon as I got on the Denver to Huntsville flight, MAN THE HARPOONS. Seriously, the obesity rate on that plane was 40-50%.
You can do perfectly good statistics on 94 people.
Any good scientific study includes both the effect ("8% brain loss") alongside an estimation of the error ("8% +/- 4%"). Over in the life sciences, when comparing the results from two groups (fat/normal, say) they like to give the probability that any difference they saw was due to chance, with suitably small values of this probability meaning that the result is considered "statistically significant".
Having a limited sample size makes it less likely that a small effect will be above this threshhold for significance (since you can't distinguish it from the noise), but it does nothing to impair the validity of the statistics themselves, so long as all the errors are estimated correctly (which they should be, if you do your math honestly).
Now, of course, the article linked in the summary doesn't actually give the significance level or the error estimates or any of those other things that are crucial to a scientific result actually meaning anything. But this is a condemnation of the shitty state of science reporting, not of the study itself.
On the decode, most mainline CPU's can decode a DVD (or divx or xvid) in realtime while running at the lowest p-state, so the difference isn't that big. Likewise, on Atom it doesn't really matter since the CPU uses so little power no matter what you do.
Indeed. I teach physics and regularly tell my students that this or that wikipedia article is pretty good and that they should go read it for more information / as a reference.
If we have a government that -- in the most general case -- fucks things up whenever it tries to help people, then we have a far bigger problem on our hands than whatever problem we're trying to solve at the moment.
You don't have to look at the DNA. You just have to look at the chromosomes -- you can tell the difference between X and Y with a much more crude test than is required to actually read off the genes.
If you let the fans do it, people will show up with high-quality amateur videorecording equipment (which is surprisingly compact these days: see Panasonic GH1) and cover your convention and stick it all over the Internet free of charge. Sure, their coverage might not be sanitized in exactly the way you want it to be, but it *will* be done.
You seem to be suggesting that the actions of a censorship-happy government (with no jurisdiction over Blizzard) should induce them to consider voluntary censorship for the rest of us. Huh?
When I was recently in China, they also blocked Facebook, Twitter, and (I think) Myspace. Oh, and Youtube. The Chinese government, no matter how big they are or how many people live under their dominion, is a bully. (The same has been very recently true of my own government, of course, and still is in many ways.) The rest of the world shouldn't be bending over backwards to accommodate them; if anything, we should be bending over backwards to make available tools like Tor, Freenet, and the like.
Why does Celsius suck for the scale on "how warm is it"?
One degree Celsius is about the smallest unit that anyone cares about for most purposes.
-10 is fucking cold 0 is freezing 10 is cool 20 is room temperature 30 is warm 40 is hot to everyone else At 45 we Arizonans go ahead and acknowledge that it's hot 50 is about as hot as it'll get.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah -- if you need a boolean definition of significance those are the ones that get used. This is common in the life sciences.
In physics we tend to just quote the number of standard deviations of signal and let people figure out how significant they think it is.
I've done that, but following its recommendations didn't help much. Is there any sort of magic checklist for how to make use of its information, other than following the recommendations given by the program?
I've often wondered whether differential calorie consumption by the brain is responsible for differences in obesity? Do the brains of less intelligent people (or people who prefer intellectually-passive activities) consume less energy and thus make their owners more likely to gain weight?
Maybe there is something to this "fat, slow, and stupid" stereotype.
I imagine he flunked ballroom dancing because he couldn't find anyone willing to dance with him.
This sounds like a stereotype, but it's really not.
I was recently in China for a conference. I'm a little guy (5'9" 145#) by US standards, but I was pretty big compared to the Chinese. I get on a plane back to the States, and was sort of shocked to see fat people again after not having seen many at all for two weeks. Upon returning I go to see my family in Alabama, with a connection in Denver.
The Tucson to Denver flight had some overweight people on it, but not too many ... but as soon as I got on the Denver to Huntsville flight, MAN THE HARPOONS. Seriously, the obesity rate on that plane was 40-50%.
You can do perfectly good statistics on 94 people.
Any good scientific study includes both the effect ("8% brain loss") alongside an estimation of the error ("8% +/- 4%"). Over in the life sciences, when comparing the results from two groups (fat/normal, say) they like to give the probability that any difference they saw was due to chance, with suitably small values of this probability meaning that the result is considered "statistically significant".
Having a limited sample size makes it less likely that a small effect will be above this threshhold for significance (since you can't distinguish it from the noise), but it does nothing to impair the validity of the statistics themselves, so long as all the errors are estimated correctly (which they should be, if you do your math honestly).
Now, of course, the article linked in the summary doesn't actually give the significance level or the error estimates or any of those other things that are crucial to a scientific result actually meaning anything. But this is a condemnation of the shitty state of science reporting, not of the study itself.
Seems like you need to upgrade Corporate IT.
Yes, it's exactly that model. Any idea how I might figure out how to do it? I'm not a hardware hacker at all.
I have the 1000HE, which has a huuuuuge battery. So a lot of it is just throwing more lithium at the problem.
And I get 7-8 hours on ubuntu with my netbook. ... but I get 10 hours in WinXP, and that's the point. We need a comparison.
HD's use far less power than optical drives.
On the decode, most mainline CPU's can decode a DVD (or divx or xvid) in realtime while running at the lowest p-state, so the difference isn't that big. Likewise, on Atom it doesn't really matter since the CPU uses so little power no matter what you do.
I get 10 hours on winxp on my eeepc, and 7.5-ish on eeebuntu.
I'd love to know what to do to optimize eeebuntu more, since that's what I need for work.
Indeed. I teach physics and regularly tell my students that this or that wikipedia article is pretty good and that they should go read it for more information / as a reference.
... like /b/?
I think I saw that story on Fox News last night.
If we have a government that -- in the most general case -- fucks things up whenever it tries to help people, then we have a far bigger problem on our hands than whatever problem we're trying to solve at the moment.
You don't have to look at the DNA. You just have to look at the chromosomes -- you can tell the difference between X and Y with a much more crude test than is required to actually read off the genes.
Wait, what?
Is that something out of Scientology lore?
A majority of the premeds I teach are, in fact, women.
Just get a computer.
A computer that can run modern games is cheaper than an xbox, after all.
You're right -- they DO have no cost.
If you let the fans do it, people will show up with high-quality amateur videorecording equipment (which is surprisingly compact these days: see Panasonic GH1) and cover your convention and stick it all over the Internet free of charge. Sure, their coverage might not be sanitized in exactly the way you want it to be, but it *will* be done.
You seem to be suggesting that the actions of a censorship-happy government (with no jurisdiction over Blizzard) should induce them to consider voluntary censorship for the rest of us. Huh?
When I was recently in China, they also blocked Facebook, Twitter, and (I think) Myspace. Oh, and Youtube. The Chinese government, no matter how big they are or how many people live under their dominion, is a bully. (The same has been very recently true of my own government, of course, and still is in many ways.) The rest of the world shouldn't be bending over backwards to accommodate them; if anything, we should be bending over backwards to make available tools like Tor, Freenet, and the like.
It's very easy to avoid D2 spambots: play using the Direct IP Connect feature.
Of course, since Blizzard is on the "use bnet or don't play" kick, then this probably won't be in D3.
I suppose we scientists are all macho, then -- I've been out in 300-degree weather!
Why does Celsius suck for the scale on "how warm is it"?
One degree Celsius is about the smallest unit that anyone cares about for most purposes.
-10 is fucking cold
0 is freezing
10 is cool
20 is room temperature
30 is warm
40 is hot to everyone else
At 45 we Arizonans go ahead and acknowledge that it's hot
50 is about as hot as it'll get.
How is this hard?