I've spent hours and hours tinkering on cars. On my old one ('88 Volvo 244) there was nothing I could not fix and replace. After it bit the dust*, I got a '01 Peugeot 307, and there's a whole lot less I can fix on it. Plastic covers everywhere, no room in the engine bay, high pressure fuel injection system, front-wheel drive, stupid connectors that I could've made better myself in 30 minutes with some glue... Newer cars are even worse. And if there is an electronic problem, you're well and truly fucked. One reason I ended up with Peugeot is that the manufacturer software and hardware to interface with the car (same they have at dealerships, way more than just ODB2) is readily available on eBay at a reasonable price. This is not true for many other manufacturers.
* it rusted. Could have been fixed, but it would have cost about twice what I payed for it in the first place.
Yeah, the idiot (and no, I really mean this) who enabled remote wiping of his devices and subsequently failed to back them up does not even deserve to be called a tech writer. It's like wiring your car alarm to trigger airbag deployment, and then not including a 10 second delay + deactivate airbag deployment switch on the dashboard.
What I do on my internet-facing server is simply to disallow password-based logins on ssh. Only public key can be used for authentication. Never had a problem with it, and it's just changing a few lines in/etc/ssh/sshd_config .
Huh, didn't know you could necrobump on/.
Nevertheless: Yes. Yes, an installer can have multiple options for satisfying its dependencies. Yes, it can check on runtime which of these are present on the system. Have you never seen the output of a "./configure" (often used before "make && make install" on Linux)? As I said previously: if you are a good programmer, it will take you roughly 10x the time you use for installing your software once to create a working installer. Then of course it depends on how often you install your software whether it makes sense for you to create an installer.
The problem with Capitalism
is that it assumes the consumer is
all-knowing and intelligent, when
(s)he is neither. I can prove anything
if I start by assuming something untrue.
I don't know about the US, but here in Northern
Europe flaring is strictly limited and can
only be used a few percent of the time.
You basically use it only when you are
ramping production up/down too fast for the
gas reinjectors to follow.
Just please, whatever, you do, don't get the HP 30s. It was the only allowed calculator the first two years I was at university, and it is complete shit. The worst thing about it is that 5% of the times you press the Left button, it thinks you pressed Up instead, and promptly erases the entire line you were typing. Without being able to recover it. Seriously, some students physically disabled the Up button as soon as they bought one.
You should also have a look at this guy: wa5jvb who makes and sells PCB antennas. They are very cheap indeed. Whether you want a Yagi or a log-periodic depends on the frequency/frequencies you want to receive.
Huh, interesting. Do you even think there are
no "two electrons"? No, since electrons
are fermions, lets say "two cooper pairs".
As to the halting problem: yes, I think "waiting
until everything has interacted with everything"
captures the crux of it. If time and space were
equal, there would be no problem. But in that
case I do not understand how a being would
exist in the first place.
I'm sorry, but if you can't make the transition from LibreOffice to MS Office fairly easily, you won't be very productive in the "corporate world" anyway. I mean, most people coming straight from college have likely never used Pivot tables or VB macros or whatever advanced Excel features the corporation is using, so you'll be training them anyway. Then again, I'm amazed at how many corporations employ people to do work that a shell script could (and should) be doing instead.
Why do kids have permission to install anything on a school PC? Hell, why are they even allowed to download executables? Someone failed at setting these computers up properly, that's for sure. For a school PC they don't even need Java or Flash (if they really need Youtube, enable HTML5 video) or Acrobat Reader (get a less common PDF reader).
Went to google. Found this:
Influence of Atlantic sea temperature on hurricane activity. This was published in the fairly prestigious journal Nature in 2008: here's the paper. It basically says:
* if hurricane activity depends on absolute temperature of Atlantic ocean, hurricane activity will increase.
* or, if hurricane activity depends on the temperature difference between different basins in the Atlantic, there will not be any increase.
As a physicist, my "common sense" suggests that the second one is more likely; basic thermodynamics tells us that temperature differences are what drive heat transfer.
To sum up, science tells us: We don't know whether AGW will lead to increased hurricane activity. Note also the green dots at the right in that figure, which are data points from high-resolution forecasting models. (I'm very fond of models, seeing as my dayjob is to make them.)
Au contraire, it seems to me that the paradox
is stronger the more observations you make.
For a situation like I described with the Higgs
boson, there is nothing paradoxical about it.
You're talking about a ridiculously complex
system, there is no "common sense".
You do realize that Edward Lorenz' research
into atmospheric convection was what started the
field of chaos theory?
Now go find me a fucking peer-reviewed article that says AGW means a higher probability of storms, or go play somewhere else. Peer-review: it's how science works.
Logicians and mathematicians all agree that the paradox is true. Observing a non-black non-raven is positive evidence that all ravens are black. The "resolution of the paradox" lies either in arguing that this positive evidence increases the probability of all ravens being black by an extremely tiny amount, or in arguing that we only see the situation as paradoxical because we already know the outcome.
Indeed, one finds the same situation in modern science: the only observed scalar particle is the Higgs boson. If we then observe a new elementary particle (say e.g. a sup quark, the supersymmetric partner of the up quark) which is not a scalar particle, this is further evidence that the Higgs is the only scalar particle.
How is that useful? The kind of person that remembers the lowest temperature at which liquid brine can exist under standard pressure should have no problem remembering the number -13 as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I've spent hours and hours tinkering on cars. On my old one ('88 Volvo 244) there was nothing I could not fix and replace. After it bit the dust*, I got a '01 Peugeot 307, and there's a whole lot less I can fix on it. Plastic covers everywhere, no room in the engine bay, high pressure fuel injection system, front-wheel drive, stupid connectors that I could've made better myself in 30 minutes with some glue... Newer cars are even worse. And if there is an electronic problem, you're well and truly fucked. One reason I ended up with Peugeot is that the manufacturer software and hardware to interface with the car (same they have at dealerships, way more than just ODB2) is readily available on eBay at a reasonable price. This is not true for many other manufacturers.
* it rusted. Could have been fixed, but it would have cost about twice what I payed for it in the first place.
Yeah, the idiot (and no, I really mean this) who enabled remote wiping of his devices and subsequently failed to back them up does not even deserve to be called a tech writer. It's like wiring your car alarm to trigger airbag deployment, and then not including a 10 second delay + deactivate airbag deployment switch on the dashboard.
I like it. That's actually a very nice system, good thinking.
What I do on my internet-facing server is simply to disallow password-based logins on ssh. Only public key can be used for authentication. Never had a problem with it, and it's just changing a few lines in /etc/ssh/sshd_config .
Huh, didn't know you could necrobump on /.
Nevertheless: Yes. Yes, an installer can have multiple options for satisfying its dependencies. Yes, it can check on runtime which of these are present on the system. Have you never seen the output of a "./configure" (often used before "make && make install" on Linux)? As I said previously: if you are a good programmer, it will take you roughly 10x the time you use for installing your software once to create a working installer. Then of course it depends on how often you install your software whether it makes sense for you to create an installer.
Quoting Reinhart's "Whole grain breads" pp. 167: "Salt is essential for most breads, except Tuscan bread and a few others"
The problem with Capitalism is that it assumes the consumer is all-knowing and intelligent, when (s)he is neither. I can prove anything if I start by assuming something untrue.
Sure, I'm just saying it's ~5% of the time, not 100%. Technical nitpicking is appropriate here on /., no?
I don't know about the US, but here in Northern Europe flaring is strictly limited and can only be used a few percent of the time. You basically use it only when you are ramping production up/down too fast for the gas reinjectors to follow.
Just please, whatever, you do, don't get the HP 30s. It was the only allowed calculator the first two years I was at university, and it is complete shit. The worst thing about it is that 5% of the times you press the Left button, it thinks you pressed Up instead, and promptly erases the entire line you were typing. Without being able to recover it. Seriously, some students physically disabled the Up button as soon as they bought one.
You should also have a look at this guy: wa5jvb who makes and sells PCB antennas. They are very cheap indeed. Whether you want a Yagi or a log-periodic depends on the frequency/frequencies you want to receive.
Huh, interesting. Do you even think there are no "two electrons"? No, since electrons are fermions, lets say "two cooper pairs".
As to the halting problem: yes, I think "waiting until everything has interacted with everything" captures the crux of it. If time and space were equal, there would be no problem. But in that case I do not understand how a being would exist in the first place.
This has been fun so far. How do you feel about the Halting problem?
I'm sorry, but if you can't make the transition from LibreOffice to MS Office fairly easily, you won't be very productive in the "corporate world" anyway. I mean, most people coming straight from college have likely never used Pivot tables or VB macros or whatever advanced Excel features the corporation is using, so you'll be training them anyway. Then again, I'm amazed at how many corporations employ people to do work that a shell script could (and should) be doing instead.
Why do kids have permission to install anything on a school PC? Hell, why are they even allowed to download executables? Someone failed at setting these computers up properly, that's for sure. For a school PC they don't even need Java or Flash (if they really need Youtube, enable HTML5 video) or Acrobat Reader (get a less common PDF reader).
Went to google. Found this: Influence of Atlantic sea temperature on hurricane activity. This was published in the fairly prestigious journal Nature in 2008: here's the paper.
It basically says:
* if hurricane activity depends on absolute temperature of Atlantic ocean, hurricane activity will increase.
* or, if hurricane activity depends on the temperature difference between different basins in the Atlantic, there will not be any increase.
As a physicist, my "common sense" suggests that the second one is more likely; basic thermodynamics tells us that temperature differences are what drive heat transfer.
To sum up, science tells us: We don't know whether AGW will lead to increased hurricane activity. Note also the green dots at the right in that figure, which are data points from high-resolution forecasting models. (I'm very fond of models, seeing as my dayjob is to make them.)
Au contraire, it seems to me that the paradox is stronger the more observations you make. For a situation like I described with the Higgs boson, there is nothing paradoxical about it.
You're talking about a ridiculously complex system, there is no "common sense". You do realize that Edward Lorenz' research into atmospheric convection was what started the field of chaos theory?
AGW increases the number and severity of storms
That's the one I want an article saying. This is science, belief has nothing to do with it.
Here you go:
Fast Particle-based Visual Simulation of Ice Melting
Dynamics of melting and stability of ice 1h: Molecular-dynamics simulations of the SPC/E model of water
Alcohol-water mixtures revisited
Now go find me a fucking peer-reviewed article that says AGW means a higher probability of storms, or go play somewhere else. Peer-review: it's how science works.
What?
Logicians and mathematicians all agree that the paradox is true. Observing a non-black non-raven is positive evidence that all ravens are black. The "resolution of the paradox" lies either in arguing that this positive evidence increases the probability of all ravens being black by an extremely tiny amount, or in arguing that we only see the situation as paradoxical because we already know the outcome.
Indeed, one finds the same situation in modern science: the only observed scalar particle is the Higgs boson. If we then observe a new elementary particle (say e.g. a sup quark, the supersymmetric partner of the up quark) which is not a scalar particle, this is further evidence that the Higgs is the only scalar particle.
[citation needed] I've seen this thrown around a lot, but noone has shown me a peer-reviewed paper saying so.
How about Microsoft Flight Simulator? Admittedly, the one I grew up on was FS 98 so it's not very recent, but that was a good piece of software.
I'll just link the raven paradox here in order to maximize the confusion.
How is that useful? The kind of person that remembers the lowest temperature at which liquid brine can exist under standard pressure should have no problem remembering the number -13 as well.