Another interesting idea would be to do the same experiment by latitude. Does the Arctic Region Supercomputing Center have a higher rate than the Maui Supercomputing Center?
They tried to do that test a few years back, but both research teams mysteriously disappeared. The leading hypothesis is that the Arctic team was eaten by polar bears, but nobody has any idea what happened to the Maui team. The only clue left at the scene was a nearly-empty glass of pina colada.
I suffer from keratoconus in both my eyes. It's a degenerative disorder whereby my corneas gradually become thinner and bulge into a cone shape, causing hopelessly-distorted vision. Until just a few years ago, you could treat some of the symptoms, but the only actual cure was to wait until it got unbearably bad and then go in for a transplant of the entire cornea. I've been legally blind since about 2007.
But this year I was able to have a newly-developed, minimally-invasive surgery done that halted the progression and strengthened my corneas. Now, after the surgery and using special contact lenses, I'm able to have 20/20 vision for the first time since I was in middle school.
Well, they have to interface with the optic nerve. I'm pulling this from half-remembered biology lectures, but IIRC nobody is actually sure if the optic nerve can handle a broader spectrum input. It might work, it might compress the new expanded spectrum into the common perceived one, or it might just flip out and overload. We don't know.
That's like saying we shouldn't have had a Civil Rights movement because at least we weren't killing our minorities like Germany did; we were just oppressing them.
"Y is worse than X" does not mean that X is not also bad.
There needs to be a way to get the supreme court's attention almost immediately if something is determined to likely be unconstitutional or is an extremely urgent matter. This is a failing of our system.
That's not a failing of our system; that's the entire point. Things "determined to likely be unconstitutional or an extremely urgent matter" describes pretty much everything the Supreme Court looks at. If it weren't urgent or important, they wouldn't even look at it at all.
Eh? The Night of the Long Knives took place in 1934, four years before Kristallnacht. Street violence from the brownshirts was a major factor leading to the Long Knives, sure, but at that time it was random and unfocused, just drunken brownshirts beating up anyone they saw. Kristallnacht was specifically focused against Jews.
Why? Why does this specific issue get to jump the line? Because it's something that you really care about?
Gay and interracial marriages had to wait in line. The right of a woman to have an abortion had to wait in line. The right of American citizens to not be placed in freaking concentration camps had to wait in line. Why is the right to not be spied on so special that everything else on SCOTUS's case list must take a backseat? Yes, it's a pressing matter and it's a terrible thing that the NSA is doing. But so is everything else that the Court looks at, too.
There is really no telling what has happened behind the scenes. Does kristallnacht ring any bells?
If you're referring to the murder of anti-Nazis within the German government, I believe you're thinking of the Night of the Long Knives, not Kristallnacht. Kristallnacht was a series of very public anti-Jewish riots.
The article from NBC mentions that there will be some cooperation.
The teams for Maven and Mangalyaan plan to collaborate in their studies of the Red Planet's atmosphere. For instance, there's been some evidence that methane is being released into the Martian atmosphere, which could hint at biological activity. Curiosity hasn't detected any methane at the surface, and Maven won't be measuring methane because that doesn't mesh with the mission's scientific goals. But Mangalyaan can take a closer look at the methane question, and its results could add to Maven's models.
Sure we would. Remember when RMS did a Q&A, and the #2 question people asked was about eating toejam?
People with celebrity status get comments/questions about their personal lives and appearances, especially if one of those is especially distinctive. Geeks are no different in this regard.
Did you miss the word "intuitive"? Do you not understand what averages are? I'm honestly not sure if I'm being trolled here, or if there is really someone in the world - and on/. no less - who believes that a simple per-capita average is "misleading with statistics". What does a trillion seconds of data tell you? Well, it tells you that they sample once per second, but not much else. Is it a lot of data or not? Well, it sure sounds like a lot - a trillion is a big number. But as I said before, I am a big number of beard-seconds tall. You claim that reducing that to a meaningful count is misleading with statistics. I say the opposite. Failing to put that number into a unit that can be intuitively grasped is obfuscation.
Why? If they are collecting data by sampling every second, then they do indeed have a trillion pieces of information. Reporting as 'hours' reduces the amount of data they actually have by 3600.
How many bits of information they have isn't the point. Informing the reader is the point. The reader sees "a trillion seconds", but is that a lot of data or not? Would a hundred billion seconds be a lot? Ten trillion? Numbers tend to lose their intuitive meeting when they get that big. If I told you I was 188 million beard-seconds tall, it would be completely true, but you would have no intuitive grasp if I am a tall person or not until you converted that number into a sensible unit.
So you convert the trillion seconds to 174 hours per person, and it actually gives the reader an intuitive picture of how much Progressive really monitors their drivers.
Progressive has more than a trillion seconds of driving data from 1.6 million customers.
Using a gigantic amount of very small units tends to make the whole thing meaningless. In more meaningful terms, Progressive has about 174 hours of data per customer.
Uhh, is it me or do folks really not know how to read basic charts? Yes, the temperature changes due to cycling glacial periods are real. They are also spread out across vast chunks of time; the rate of these cyclic background climate changes are very, very, very slow.
Not guilty, your Honor! Death is a natural cycle; he was dying before I ever met him! The bullets I shot into him had nothing to do with it.
For that use, sure, it's fine. But everyone who's ever tried to use voice communications while playing a game has known that guy, who continuously pounds on his keyboard like it banged his wife, and who absolutely refuses to use a push-to-talk key.
One of the things about 3D is that the consumers have shown that they are not particularly interested in spending a whole lot more money in order to get 3D. And the installed base is growing but it is not growing fast enough to support the development projects by the broadcasters and the content producers. ESPN was singular for being way out in front on developing 3D content especially for live sports coverage. And they have actually pulled the plug on a lot of that activity now because I think, in part, they are just not getting the viewership for it.
Smart observation. But then...
And it is just a matter of time in my opinion for the installed base to get to the point where people are going to be able to take advantage of it and will want to take advantage of it,
WRONG CONCLUSION.
People do not want 3dtv. The market research shows this clearly, as he himself states. Then he does a 180 and starts pushing 3d. The fact that it's baked into every TV on Best Buy's shelves (for a significant markup, of course) is NOT A GOOD THING. Maybe TV sales wouldn't be so damn bad if TV manufacturers didn't keep trying to shove every damn bell and whistle in our faces for an extra $100. Just give us a big, pretty screen. That's all we want. No cameras in our TVs, no 3d, no internet bullshit. If I want internet on my TV I'll plug my computer into the HDMI port. If I want a camera I'll plug in a camera. If I want 3d I'll...wait, I'll never want 3d, because it's retarded.
Devil's advocate: the reason the negotiations are kept secret is because that a lot of things get put on the table that won't appear in the final draft. The US, say, might put forward a proposal that throws its dairy industry under the bus in exchange for all of New Zealand's gold mines or something. In a public negotiation the dairy industry would read about this proposal and raise an uproar. Then the proposals change, as proposals are wont to do, and the dairy farmer part is cut out. But the average dairy farmer still thinks he's getting screwed.
(still devil's advocate) So they keep the negotiations secret, because they don't want people getting in a fuss over things that won't be in the final draft, but are just part of the wheeling and dealing. The final result, of course, will not be secret, and will be revealed to the public before the Senate votes to approve the treaty or not. Any objections can be voiced at that time.
"The founders" were not, as is sometimes believed today, all in agreement over what they were writing at the time. Madison believed in a narrow interpretation of the general welfare clause. Hamilton believed in a broad one. I'm sorry you disagree with the Supreme Court of the United States, but their ruling and precedent siding with Hamilton has been in place since 1936. If it were at all controversial, they've had many opportunities to overturn it.
In Planetside, you started out with enough Cert Points that you could get/use any gun in the game at level 1. Of course, grinding out more levels allowed you to have more guns at the ready without re-speccing, but that certainly wasn't a requirement to win or have fun. And given that it was a PvP game, I'm not sure if "killing more people" really qualified as grinding anyway.
"Promotion of scientific progress" seems pretty broad. Can anyone think of some basic research going on right now that wouldn't fit in one of those six categories? Seems to me like this is just an extra layer of paperwork, rather than an actual restriction on science, despite coming from vaunted luddite Lamar Smith.
Slashdot Mirror
Another interesting idea would be to do the same experiment by latitude. Does the Arctic Region Supercomputing Center have a higher rate than the Maui Supercomputing Center?
They tried to do that test a few years back, but both research teams mysteriously disappeared. The leading hypothesis is that the Arctic team was eaten by polar bears, but nobody has any idea what happened to the Maui team. The only clue left at the scene was a nearly-empty glass of pina colada.
I suffer from keratoconus in both my eyes. It's a degenerative disorder whereby my corneas gradually become thinner and bulge into a cone shape, causing hopelessly-distorted vision. Until just a few years ago, you could treat some of the symptoms, but the only actual cure was to wait until it got unbearably bad and then go in for a transplant of the entire cornea. I've been legally blind since about 2007.
But this year I was able to have a newly-developed, minimally-invasive surgery done that halted the progression and strengthened my corneas. Now, after the surgery and using special contact lenses, I'm able to have 20/20 vision for the first time since I was in middle school.
Underwhelmed? Fuck, man, I love the future.
Well, they have to interface with the optic nerve. I'm pulling this from half-remembered biology lectures, but IIRC nobody is actually sure if the optic nerve can handle a broader spectrum input. It might work, it might compress the new expanded spectrum into the common perceived one, or it might just flip out and overload. We don't know.
But then who's going to move you to open floor layouts to "improve collaboration"?
I don't understand why open-floor layouts get a bad rap. I work in one now, and it's great. I never want to see the inside of another cube.
That's like saying we shouldn't have had a Civil Rights movement because at least we weren't killing our minorities like Germany did; we were just oppressing them.
"Y is worse than X" does not mean that X is not also bad.
There needs to be a way to get the supreme court's attention almost immediately if something is determined to likely be unconstitutional or is an extremely urgent matter. This is a failing of our system.
That's not a failing of our system; that's the entire point. Things "determined to likely be unconstitutional or an extremely urgent matter" describes pretty much everything the Supreme Court looks at. If it weren't urgent or important, they wouldn't even look at it at all.
And yet, his comments on this article are completely correct.
Eh? The Night of the Long Knives took place in 1934, four years before Kristallnacht. Street violence from the brownshirts was a major factor leading to the Long Knives, sure, but at that time it was random and unfocused, just drunken brownshirts beating up anyone they saw. Kristallnacht was specifically focused against Jews.
Bush v. Gore was appealed from the Florida Supreme Court. It did not go straight to the SCOTUS.
Why? Why does this specific issue get to jump the line? Because it's something that you really care about?
Gay and interracial marriages had to wait in line. The right of a woman to have an abortion had to wait in line. The right of American citizens to not be placed in freaking concentration camps had to wait in line. Why is the right to not be spied on so special that everything else on SCOTUS's case list must take a backseat? Yes, it's a pressing matter and it's a terrible thing that the NSA is doing. But so is everything else that the Court looks at, too.
There is really no telling what has happened behind the scenes. Does kristallnacht ring any bells?
If you're referring to the murder of anti-Nazis within the German government, I believe you're thinking of the Night of the Long Knives, not Kristallnacht. Kristallnacht was a series of very public anti-Jewish riots.
The teams for Maven and Mangalyaan plan to collaborate in their studies of the Red Planet's atmosphere. For instance, there's been some evidence that methane is being released into the Martian atmosphere, which could hint at biological activity. Curiosity hasn't detected any methane at the surface, and Maven won't be measuring methane because that doesn't mesh with the mission's scientific goals. But Mangalyaan can take a closer look at the methane question, and its results could add to Maven's models.
Seriously, would we do this for a male engineer?
Sure we would. Remember when RMS did a Q&A, and the #2 question people asked was about eating toejam?
People with celebrity status get comments/questions about their personal lives and appearances, especially if one of those is especially distinctive. Geeks are no different in this regard.
Did you miss the word "intuitive"? Do you not understand what averages are? I'm honestly not sure if I'm being trolled here, or if there is really someone in the world - and on /. no less - who believes that a simple per-capita average is "misleading with statistics". What does a trillion seconds of data tell you? Well, it tells you that they sample once per second, but not much else. Is it a lot of data or not? Well, it sure sounds like a lot - a trillion is a big number. But as I said before, I am a big number of beard-seconds tall. You claim that reducing that to a meaningful count is misleading with statistics. I say the opposite. Failing to put that number into a unit that can be intuitively grasped is obfuscation.
Why? If they are collecting data by sampling every second, then they do indeed have a trillion pieces of information. Reporting as 'hours' reduces the amount of data they actually have by 3600.
How many bits of information they have isn't the point. Informing the reader is the point. The reader sees "a trillion seconds", but is that a lot of data or not? Would a hundred billion seconds be a lot? Ten trillion? Numbers tend to lose their intuitive meeting when they get that big. If I told you I was 188 million beard-seconds tall, it would be completely true, but you would have no intuitive grasp if I am a tall person or not until you converted that number into a sensible unit.
So you convert the trillion seconds to 174 hours per person, and it actually gives the reader an intuitive picture of how much Progressive really monitors their drivers.
Progressive has more than a trillion seconds of driving data from 1.6 million customers.
Using a gigantic amount of very small units tends to make the whole thing meaningless. In more meaningful terms, Progressive has about 174 hours of data per customer.
Uhh, is it me or do folks really not know how to read basic charts? Yes, the temperature changes due to cycling glacial periods are real. They are also spread out across vast chunks of time; the rate of these cyclic background climate changes are very, very, very slow.
Not guilty, your Honor! Death is a natural cycle; he was dying before I ever met him! The bullets I shot into him had nothing to do with it.
For that use, sure, it's fine. But everyone who's ever tried to use voice communications while playing a game has known that guy, who continuously pounds on his keyboard like it banged his wife, and who absolutely refuses to use a push-to-talk key.
One of the things about 3D is that the consumers have shown that they are not particularly interested in spending a whole lot more money in order to get 3D. And the installed base is growing but it is not growing fast enough to support the development projects by the broadcasters and the content producers. ESPN was singular for being way out in front on developing 3D content especially for live sports coverage. And they have actually pulled the plug on a lot of that activity now because I think, in part, they are just not getting the viewership for it.
Smart observation. But then...
And it is just a matter of time in my opinion for the installed base to get to the point where people are going to be able to take advantage of it and will want to take advantage of it,
WRONG CONCLUSION.
People do not want 3dtv. The market research shows this clearly, as he himself states. Then he does a 180 and starts pushing 3d. The fact that it's baked into every TV on Best Buy's shelves (for a significant markup, of course) is NOT A GOOD THING. Maybe TV sales wouldn't be so damn bad if TV manufacturers didn't keep trying to shove every damn bell and whistle in our faces for an extra $100. Just give us a big, pretty screen. That's all we want. No cameras in our TVs, no 3d, no internet bullshit. If I want internet on my TV I'll plug my computer into the HDMI port. If I want a camera I'll plug in a camera. If I want 3d I'll...wait, I'll never want 3d, because it's retarded.
Devil's advocate: the reason the negotiations are kept secret is because that a lot of things get put on the table that won't appear in the final draft. The US, say, might put forward a proposal that throws its dairy industry under the bus in exchange for all of New Zealand's gold mines or something. In a public negotiation the dairy industry would read about this proposal and raise an uproar. Then the proposals change, as proposals are wont to do, and the dairy farmer part is cut out. But the average dairy farmer still thinks he's getting screwed.
(still devil's advocate) So they keep the negotiations secret, because they don't want people getting in a fuss over things that won't be in the final draft, but are just part of the wheeling and dealing. The final result, of course, will not be secret, and will be revealed to the public before the Senate votes to approve the treaty or not. Any objections can be voiced at that time.
"The founders" were not, as is sometimes believed today, all in agreement over what they were writing at the time. Madison believed in a narrow interpretation of the general welfare clause. Hamilton believed in a broad one. I'm sorry you disagree with the Supreme Court of the United States, but their ruling and precedent siding with Hamilton has been in place since 1936. If it were at all controversial, they've had many opportunities to overturn it.
Wait. Stellan Skarsgard goes pantsless?
...I'm not sure I want to see this movie anymore.
In Planetside, you started out with enough Cert Points that you could get/use any gun in the game at level 1. Of course, grinding out more levels allowed you to have more guns at the ready without re-speccing, but that certainly wasn't a requirement to win or have fun. And given that it was a PvP game, I'm not sure if "killing more people" really qualified as grinding anyway.
Needs the method how the gordian knot was solved
Let the Greeks do it for us?
"Promotion of scientific progress" seems pretty broad. Can anyone think of some basic research going on right now that wouldn't fit in one of those six categories? Seems to me like this is just an extra layer of paperwork, rather than an actual restriction on science, despite coming from vaunted luddite Lamar Smith.