Agreed, but we weren't looking for 'easy'. If the concept you're trying to put into code needs comments to help you wrap your head around it, that smells exactly like a piece of code that needs thorough testing.
Yeah and what happens when the 'worknotes' server is taken offline or moves? If you can't explain what your code does in the space you have, you're doing something wrong.
Of course you are right. I merely meant to point out that there is no reason to re-invent everything just because it's in space. Sending supplies ahead years in advance, or putting them in strategic places along the planned route for the manned mission might be more feasible than having 20 odd lab rats think up new ways of canning food.
My thought too, I remember being told in high school that about 1000 people was minimum to draw any sorts of conclusions from polls. I would expect that to hold for lab science with people too? Also i saw a documentary some time ago, i believe it was on BBC about sleep where they followed a morning news host who got up at like 4 am. They used a blue colored light to simulate the sun's effect on the human brain to suppress melatonin on her. The sleep expert guy said it was the color of the light more than the intensity of it that had an effect.
Well the number of phones to number of kids doesn't have to be 1:1, so you might get away with diagnosing a hundred kids with the same phone. The $20 price comes from being able to diagnose pneumonia without a medical degree i guess.
The project looks extremely interesting and useful, but I don't get why they wish to base it on "the cloud". Does their algorithm really require a centralized server to compute a result? Seems to me that would prohibit the application's use in areas where an internet link is not available.
It's not that difficult to see why 4:1 might be about right, we currently have iOS, Android and Windows 8/Metro/Phone/Fail, that's 3 projects for one actual application once you start porting it to the other two.
Well that pretty much proves the point doesn't it? AEB is importing trash at the expense of CO2, how come these plants aren't being constructed where the waste is generated? Seems to me that would be better for the environment, but not so much for the coffers of AEB.
The actual technology behind the plant looks at first glance pretty interesting, but the plant burns the fuel, creating what in the process? Less CO2 than their competitors? None? The site only states that they've gotten some kind of recognition from the Dutch government for turning trash into power.
Besides, the article above deals with sewage, which doesn't seem to be on order by AEB anywhere.
Very true, profit brings attention and that could very well be a good thing for developing nations like China. For the nations where waste treatment is already mandated and a priority I'm not so sure though. I mean, the is a reason we even have buzzwords like "green energy" and "sustainable growth", and it's not because of the altruistic motives of private enterprises.
Currently waste treatment does not turn a profit. Not without the help of government funding at least, this information can be read indirectly from the article:
“If this technology works on a commercial scale the way we believe it will, the treatment of wastewater could be a huge energy producer, not a huge energy cost,” said Hong Liu
When a sector formerly under government control is suddenly able to turn a profit, what will happen? A: the government pockets the difference B: the sector is privatized and the elected politician earns another period in his chair by cutting tax that was previously used to fund the plant. C: nothing cause profiteering gluttons already have all the means they need to bring in cash and will of course pass up the opportunity to make money from your shit.
The system also works better than an alternative approach to creating electricity from wastewater, based on anaerobic digestion that produces methane. It treats the wastewater more effectively, and doesn’t have any of the environmental drawbacks of that technology, such as production of unwanted hydrogen sulfide or possible release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
Yeah I'm not sure we actually want "profitable" slabbed on something as important as waste treatment. That word is commonly followed by words like "margin" and leads to all sorts of nasty shortcuts that are just barely inside the often arbitrary law requirements.
I also recently endured the switch from Windows 7 to Linux while taking a course at university. We were required to alter the kernel for class projects, so I figured I might as well get some user experience time in while i was at it. I chose Ubuntu since that seems to be the prevalent distro, and the herd is never wrong!
Anyways after about 2 days i ditched Ubuntu, the global menu absolutely sucks. Installing a new X-window manager absolutely sucks. I then went for Kubuntu since all i really wanted was an escape from that awful menu. I know i could have just installed an older version of Ubuntu, but why should I have to? Kubuntu and Ubuntu alike boasts an update feature. A feature which consistently broke my install every time, on both distros. Half downloaded, half installed updates littered my drive, eventually breaking the updater itself.
The command "sudo bash" became my friend because so many little problems needed fixing from the commandline, in a tiny text window with a format 30+ years old? Why is that?
Lack of proper support for non-Us keyboards actually locked me out of my PC one morning when the damned thing decided it wouldn't recognize my password anymore. I had to hack it by switching the drive to my main desktop and manually edit the passwd to reset.
From a user perspective Linux is like wrestling a wild beast you know will kill you if you slip up just once. Don't force it on people who doesn't have the time for the learning experience it is to find and fix the little problems. Those people need to be productive.
As i understand the issue, a mutation that would have been deadly in the past can now sometimes be "fixed" in some way or another, and the defective gene is thus allowed to spread. I get why this is bad if suddenly society collapses and the treatment is no longer available, or at least bad for the carriers of that particular gene.
But in the case where the world goes on and the treatment remains available, wouldn't the defective genes offer new combinations to make new mutations from that won't all be bad? And these combinations would not be available if the defective gene was not carried forward?
In essence any mutation is just a change in the pairing of the original copy of a genome right?
A few of us who moderate don't give a shit who's the next figurehead of your government, yet we still realize that your comment adds nothing to the discussion and thus you get modded down. Being a fan of either of the morons running for the seat does not make your comment any more constructive.
I am not defending Ms. Annette Schavan nor condoning what she did, but I gotta say that it's getting harder and harder these days to finish a major thesis without actually adopting (copying?) ideas from online sources
And regarding "Attribution" --- Unless you keep a very detailed log of at what date and time you visited which site and what information interested you and who is the author of that article, it is very hard to keep tract of what you've copied from whom and where you've copied it from
Being hard is no excuse for not doing it. Keeping track of your sources is not a huge task, since the information most often is available right in front of you when you're reading someones work already.
Corps do not need representation for paying tax. All their employees have representation that should be enough. They need to pay tax everywhere they do business, for the priviledge of using the infrastructure that the rest of us paid for.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, but we weren't looking for 'easy'. If the concept you're trying to put into code needs comments to help you wrap your head around it, that smells exactly like a piece of code that needs thorough testing.
Better yet: don't write comments you know you are going to delete, write tests. That way you wasted no time typing.
Yeah and what happens when the 'worknotes' server is taken offline or moves? If you can't explain what your code does in the space you have, you're doing something wrong.
Of course you are right. I merely meant to point out that there is no reason to re-invent everything just because it's in space. Sending supplies ahead years in advance, or putting them in strategic places along the planned route for the manned mission might be more feasible than having 20 odd lab rats think up new ways of canning food.
Well, a resupply module does not need a reasonable flight path, it just needs to be there in time for the astronauts to utilize it.
Load balancing (computing)
My thought too, I remember being told in high school that about 1000 people was minimum to draw any sorts of conclusions from polls. I would expect that to hold for lab science with people too?
Also i saw a documentary some time ago, i believe it was on BBC about sleep where they followed a morning news host who got up at like 4 am. They used a blue colored light to simulate the sun's effect on the human brain to suppress melatonin on her. The sleep expert guy said it was the color of the light more than the intensity of it that had an effect.
Theft implies loss of property.
Well the number of phones to number of kids doesn't have to be 1:1, so you might get away with diagnosing a hundred kids with the same phone. The $20 price comes from being able to diagnose pneumonia without a medical degree i guess.
The project looks extremely interesting and useful, but I don't get why they wish to base it on "the cloud". Does their algorithm really require a centralized server to compute a result? Seems to me that would prohibit the application's use in areas where an internet link is not available.
It's not that difficult to see why 4:1 might be about right, we currently have iOS, Android and Windows 8/Metro/Phone/Fail, that's 3 projects for one actual application once you start porting it to the other two.
Well that pretty much proves the point doesn't it? AEB is importing trash at the expense of CO2, how come these plants aren't being constructed where the waste is generated?
Seems to me that would be better for the environment, but not so much for the coffers of AEB.
The actual technology behind the plant looks at first glance pretty interesting, but the plant burns the fuel, creating what in the process? Less CO2 than their competitors? None? The site only states that they've gotten some kind of recognition from the Dutch government for turning trash into power.
Besides, the article above deals with sewage, which doesn't seem to be on order by AEB anywhere.
Very true, profit brings attention and that could very well be a good thing for developing nations like China. For the nations where waste treatment is already mandated and a priority I'm not so sure though. I mean, the is a reason we even have buzzwords like "green energy" and "sustainable growth", and it's not because of the altruistic motives of private enterprises.
Currently waste treatment does not turn a profit. Not without the help of government funding at least, this information can be read indirectly from the article:
“If this technology works on a commercial scale the way we believe it will, the treatment of wastewater could be a huge energy producer, not a huge energy cost,” said Hong Liu
When a sector formerly under government control is suddenly able to turn a profit, what will happen?
A: the government pockets the difference
B: the sector is privatized and the elected politician earns another period in his chair by cutting tax that was previously used to fund the plant.
C: nothing cause profiteering gluttons already have all the means they need to bring in cash and will of course pass up the opportunity to make money from your shit.
From TFA:
The system also works better than an alternative approach to creating electricity from wastewater, based on anaerobic digestion that produces methane. It treats the wastewater more effectively, and doesn’t have any of the environmental drawbacks of that technology, such as production of unwanted hydrogen sulfide or possible release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
Yeah I'm not sure we actually want "profitable" slabbed on something as important as waste treatment. That word is commonly followed by words like "margin" and leads to all sorts of nasty shortcuts that are just barely inside the often arbitrary law requirements.
I also recently endured the switch from Windows 7 to Linux while taking a course at university. We were required to alter the kernel for class projects, so I figured I might as well get some user experience time in while i was at it. I chose Ubuntu since that seems to be the prevalent distro, and the herd is never wrong!
Anyways after about 2 days i ditched Ubuntu, the global menu absolutely sucks. Installing a new X-window manager absolutely sucks. I then went for Kubuntu since all i really wanted was an escape from that awful menu. I know i could have just installed an older version of Ubuntu, but why should I have to?
Kubuntu and Ubuntu alike boasts an update feature. A feature which consistently broke my install every time, on both distros. Half downloaded, half installed updates littered my drive, eventually breaking the updater itself.
The command "sudo bash" became my friend because so many little problems needed fixing from the commandline, in a tiny text window with a format 30+ years old? Why is that?
Lack of proper support for non-Us keyboards actually locked me out of my PC one morning when the damned thing decided it wouldn't recognize my password anymore. I had to hack it by switching the drive to my main desktop and manually edit the passwd to reset.
From a user perspective Linux is like wrestling a wild beast you know will kill you if you slip up just once. Don't force it on people who doesn't have the time for the learning experience it is to find and fix the little problems. Those people need to be productive.
As i understand the issue, a mutation that would have been deadly in the past can now sometimes be "fixed" in some way or another, and the defective gene is thus allowed to spread. I get why this is bad if suddenly society collapses and the treatment is no longer available, or at least bad for the carriers of that particular gene. But in the case where the world goes on and the treatment remains available, wouldn't the defective genes offer new combinations to make new mutations from that won't all be bad? And these combinations would not be available if the defective gene was not carried forward? In essence any mutation is just a change in the pairing of the original copy of a genome right?
A few of us who moderate don't give a shit who's the next figurehead of your government, yet we still realize that your comment adds nothing to the discussion and thus you get modded down. Being a fan of either of the morons running for the seat does not make your comment any more constructive.
Thank you. I knew i had seen an article about this not too long ago.
I'd mod parent up if i had any points left, simply for pointing out that almost any action can be spun to work for some agenda or other.
I am not defending Ms. Annette Schavan nor condoning what she did, but I gotta say that it's getting harder and harder these days to finish a major thesis without actually adopting (copying?) ideas from online sources
And regarding "Attribution" --- Unless you keep a very detailed log of at what date and time you visited which site and what information interested you and who is the author of that article, it is very hard to keep tract of what you've copied from whom and where you've copied it from
Being hard is no excuse for not doing it. Keeping track of your sources is not a huge task, since the information most often is available right in front of you when you're reading someones work already.
Corps do not need representation for paying tax. All their employees have representation that should be enough. They need to pay tax everywhere they do business, for the priviledge of using the infrastructure that the rest of us paid for.
37 minutes left..... (10 minutes pass) 36 minutes left.... (10 minutes pass) 35 minutes left... (zing) 37 minutes left...
If the second bug he found really is a buffer overflow vulnerability, there could be no end to the funny shit you could do to your TV.