There should be absolutely no language barriers at all. All post-11th grade education in India is English-based (India was a British colony after all). So if your staff is university educated, they should be almost as good as native speakers (albeit with an accent). If not, they suck way more than from a technical standpoint and shouldn't be hired in the first place.
This sounds like the myomer technology used to allow battlemechs to move around in the battletech universe. UT is also conducting railgun research, the Air Force is testing airborne anti-ballistic lasers, and we already have a new vehicular anti-missile system (Trophy ADS). All we need now is a fusion reactor to power a tank and we'll be one step closer to hearing "Reactor: Online, Sensors: Online, Weapons: Online, All Systems Nominal."
I would imply that you always expect the Republicans/conservatives to reject any proposal that might somehow marginalize "the American way of life". You expect better from the other side of the political fence, the ones who actually profess some inclination to move away from dependence on foreign oil, reduce carbon emissions, etc.
But that's because the likes of Ed Kennedy and John Kerry don't want it and therefore can lobby to stop it. 6 miles offshore, even experienced mariners wouldn't be able to tell if the windmills are clouds or boats or whitecaps. Though Kennedy and Kerry are known as "progressive" liberals, they will nevertheless yell NIMBY at the top of their lungs.
A critical responsiblity of the dbms is to ensure data integrity independently, that is: the dbms should have the native capability to never have to rely on and/or trust the accessing client to sanitize or validate input data. This means that it is more desirable for a query to fail than for the dbms to try and guess intention of or worse, "correct" the query if the query will result in a constraint violation. There should be no so-called "undefined" behaviors. If an outcome of a query won't be deterministic, it should fail (excluding things using an auxillary prng for obvious reasons), or barring that, at least emitting a warning. The speed of the query should always secondary to the resulting integrity of the data.
Several MySQL gotchas have been documented on stable versions. Many of these are egregious pitfalls plaguing this dbms. Some of these are just plain violations of SQL (i.e. playing with the definition of NULL or column types behaviors like VARCHAR), to outright altering input.
Finally, the reliability is atrocious. Since there is no "repair table" option for innodb, I have to fetch a backup copy of the db because it gets corrupted so easily. The concept of supporting atomic transactions is made irrelevant if the physical portion of the engine still gets trashed in a way requiring major manual intervention.
Also footprint size. The case is attached to the screen and fits on the desk instead of having to have it on the floor or somewhere else. Also with a laptop "desktop replacement", you minimize cableage between case, screen, and peripherals; sure you can use wireless everything on a desktop, but who does that (and the receivers still need to be wired to usb or something). The mac mini has in my opinion been able to successfully exploit the gap between the desktops and laptops, sort of like the dome-shaped imacs; however you still cannot just take it with you at a whim.
Clock for clock, for pure computational demands, very little beats 64bit POWER architecture with real vector instructions. I'd definitely like to see IBM sell something like an apple xserve for us relatively poor scientists who want POWER for doing lots of raw number crunching: fft and molecular dynamics in particular.
hand written check? are we back to the good 'ole days of dot matrix printers now? everyone uses payroll companies that distribute preprinted checks these days. Most people are on some sort of direct deposit system anyway and don't see a check to begin with (only the stub).
hi. AD is just LDAP with some extra cruft/bloat/stuff added; which is mostly documented anyway. Your IT department is clueless. You can also fall back to kerberos (which despite the FUD, interoperates with the majority of MIT Kerberos V implementations), if you did not have a functional (Open)LDAP infrastructure.
actually the entire premise of the convention is flawed because the current model of time traveled dictated by relativity suggests that one cannot travel backwards in time past the point where the time machine was discovered/invented.
Ok if you want total immersion you will minimally need the following technology:
head mounted display (HMD), which has the following functional requirements:
3D motion tracking/telemetry
high resolution display
"ease" of use
Full body tactile feedback suit also supporting basic telemetry (i.e. position of limbs)
devices for simulating body position (i.e. treadmill for walking, chair for sitting, etc.)
All this stuff can use USB2 or firewire to interface with the computer. Then all you need to do is write the driver and application support code (like currently exists for joysticks, headsets, and DDR pads). The problem is, the current VR devices cost too much for your typical gamer to buy it just to play counterstrike in full immersion.
It would be pretty bloody. Imagine all of the zealots turning every debate into a flamewar? "Should we abolish the death penalty" would never get answered cuz everyone invovled would have killed each other in a week! Then add in all the lamers barging in on cabinet sessions yelling "First Post!".
We were discussing the X11 OpenGL server at the LWE X BoF session. IIRC, the current problem with full native implementation of the OGL server is that starting the ogl server requires the dri layer, which requires an X server to be running.
Editors of science journals (i.e. an ACS journal) tend to be voluntary. They get some compensation, but being editor are not their dayjobs. These people are usually faculty members of an academic institution. Revewers/referees are also faculty members or research scientists picked by the journal to review/referee a manuscript, but they are usually uncompensated or compensated very little for this service (like/. mod status, the primary benefit is being able to moderate what is published or not, and associated mutual backscratching [reviewer A who frequently accepts author B's manuscripts can expect a reasonably good chance that B will favorably review A's manuscripts; most journals allow you to specify a list of preferred referees]).
Again, for these journals, the layout and graphics people are typically outsourced to the same company or division providing the printing services, so overhead-wise, the journal itself really only needs to provide the author- and reviewer- facing services (correspondance, preprint proofing, referee selection).
On the other claw, there are political angles in science too, especially as theoretical science becomes more substantial. Even "peer-reviewed" sources are not immune to this, as illustrated by the alleged abuse of ArXiv blacklisting dissenting physicist Carlos Castro.
While "lack of peer-review" has been the age-old complaint that everyone spouts, the heated interchange between wikipedia and brittanica illustrate that while wikipedia review could use some partitioning of reliable vs. possibly unreliable sources (i.e. advogato-style "poster accreditation"), it is harder and harder to dismiss a more "democratic" process of doing science merely out-of-hand.
Personally, I find it's damned frustrating to try and publish a scientific paper in a substantial journal that flatly refuses to even send my manuscript to a reviewer because I'm basically the equivalent of a "n00b" in a particular specialty.
The Mir accident was due to human error actually. They try to dock it manually, and the operator miscalculated the lateral course deviation, because he was only relying on the one dimensional radar beacon.
"Traditional" academic journals actually get very little money from commercial advertising. Many specialized field journals have been using "pay for play" models well before the Internet came along. With these journals, such as the Journal of Immunology, each article usually bears the following disclaimer:
The cost of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
I have been through the manuscript submission process and you have to pay big bucks once your paper is accepted for publication: $200 per article if you have supplemental information (material that doesn't fit in the manuscript but still published), $70 per printed page, and $325 per color figure for printing a Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences article. If you want to allow your article on Open Access, you'll need to pony up another $750-$1000 dollars.
This would be like implementing a sort of "statute of limitations" on patent violations. If the patent holder does nothing about violations of a patent after x years, then nobody can be sued for requesting royalties for using that patent. Now, your point #3 is a bit too forceful though, because finding out if a consortium member holds a patent on a key technology component is not difficult to do by other parties involved (by difficult meaning search space is already narrowed to the consortium member and that you only have to task your IP lawyers to find if say Rambus and the other 10 or so other companies hold any outstanding patents on the technology).
Slashdot Mirror
There should be absolutely no language barriers at all. All post-11th grade education in India is English-based (India was a British colony after all). So if your staff is university educated, they should be almost as good as native speakers (albeit with an accent). If not, they suck way more than from a technical standpoint and shouldn't be hired in the first place.
This sounds like the myomer technology used to allow battlemechs to move around in the battletech universe. UT is also conducting railgun research, the Air Force is testing airborne anti-ballistic lasers, and we already have a new vehicular anti-missile system (Trophy ADS). All we need now is a fusion reactor to power a tank and we'll be one step closer to hearing "Reactor: Online, Sensors: Online, Weapons: Online, All Systems Nominal."
I would imply that you always expect the Republicans/conservatives to reject any proposal that might somehow marginalize "the American way of life". You expect better from the other side of the political fence, the ones who actually profess some inclination to move away from dependence on foreign oil, reduce carbon emissions, etc.
But that's because the likes of Ed Kennedy and John Kerry don't want it and therefore can lobby to stop it. 6 miles offshore, even experienced mariners wouldn't be able to tell if the windmills are clouds or boats or whitecaps. Though Kennedy and Kerry are known as "progressive" liberals, they will nevertheless yell NIMBY at the top of their lungs.
They're going to get worse, before anything else, if people on the ground have any credibility at all.
A critical responsiblity of the dbms is to ensure data integrity independently, that is: the dbms should have the native capability to never have to rely on and/or trust the accessing client to sanitize or validate input data. This means that it is more desirable for a query to fail than for the dbms to try and guess intention of or worse, "correct" the query if the query will result in a constraint violation. There should be no so-called "undefined" behaviors. If an outcome of a query won't be deterministic, it should fail (excluding things using an auxillary prng for obvious reasons), or barring that, at least emitting a warning. The speed of the query should always secondary to the resulting integrity of the data.
Several MySQL gotchas have been documented on stable versions. Many of these are egregious pitfalls plaguing this dbms. Some of these are just plain violations of SQL (i.e. playing with the definition of NULL or column types behaviors like VARCHAR), to outright altering input.
Finally, the reliability is atrocious. Since there is no "repair table" option for innodb, I have to fetch a backup copy of the db because it gets corrupted so easily. The concept of supporting atomic transactions is made irrelevant if the physical portion of the engine still gets trashed in a way requiring major manual intervention.
Also footprint size. The case is attached to the screen and fits on the desk instead of having to have it on the floor or somewhere else. Also with a laptop "desktop replacement", you minimize cableage between case, screen, and peripherals; sure you can use wireless everything on a desktop, but who does that (and the receivers still need to be wired to usb or something). The mac mini has in my opinion been able to successfully exploit the gap between the desktops and laptops, sort of like the dome-shaped imacs; however you still cannot just take it with you at a whim.
So have you been able to trace the current rights holder of the game and get their IP released or what?
Clock for clock, for pure computational demands, very little beats 64bit POWER architecture with real vector instructions. I'd definitely like to see IBM sell something like an apple xserve for us relatively poor scientists who want POWER for doing lots of raw number crunching: fft and molecular dynamics in particular.
hand written check? are we back to the good 'ole days of dot matrix printers now? everyone uses payroll companies that distribute preprinted checks these days. Most people are on some sort of direct deposit system anyway and don't see a check to begin with (only the stub).
hi. AD is just LDAP with some extra cruft/bloat/stuff added; which is mostly documented anyway. Your IT department is clueless. You can also fall back to kerberos (which despite the FUD, interoperates with the majority of MIT Kerberos V implementations), if you did not have a functional (Open)LDAP infrastructure.
yes that is what i was referring to. You can bend spacetime to form CTCs.
you just called Wheeler and Thorne liars. way to go there.
actually the entire premise of the convention is flawed because the current model of time traveled dictated by relativity suggests that one cannot travel backwards in time past the point where the time machine was discovered/invented.
- head mounted display (HMD), which has the following functional requirements:
- 3D motion tracking/telemetry
- high resolution display
- "ease" of use
- Full body tactile feedback suit also supporting basic telemetry (i.e. position of limbs)
- devices for simulating body position (i.e. treadmill for walking, chair for sitting, etc.)
All this stuff can use USB2 or firewire to interface with the computer. Then all you need to do is write the driver and application support code (like currently exists for joysticks, headsets, and DDR pads). The problem is, the current VR devices cost too much for your typical gamer to buy it just to play counterstrike in full immersion.It would be pretty bloody. Imagine all of the zealots turning every debate into a flamewar? "Should we abolish the death penalty" would never get answered cuz everyone invovled would have killed each other in a week! Then add in all the lamers barging in on cabinet sessions yelling "First Post!".
We were discussing the X11 OpenGL server at the LWE X BoF session. IIRC, the current problem with full native implementation of the OGL server is that starting the ogl server requires the dri layer, which requires an X server to be running.
Editors of science journals (i.e. an ACS journal) tend to be voluntary. They get some compensation, but being editor are not their dayjobs. These people are usually faculty members of an academic institution. Revewers/referees are also faculty members or research scientists picked by the journal to review/referee a manuscript, but they are usually uncompensated or compensated very little for this service (like /. mod status, the primary benefit is being able to moderate what is published or not, and associated mutual backscratching [reviewer A who frequently accepts author B's manuscripts can expect a reasonably good chance that B will favorably review A's manuscripts; most journals allow you to specify a list of preferred referees]).
Again, for these journals, the layout and graphics people are typically outsourced to the same company or division providing the printing services, so overhead-wise, the journal itself really only needs to provide the author- and reviewer- facing services (correspondance, preprint proofing, referee selection).
On the other claw, there are political angles in science too, especially as theoretical science becomes more substantial. Even "peer-reviewed" sources are not immune to this, as illustrated by the alleged abuse of ArXiv blacklisting dissenting physicist Carlos Castro.
While "lack of peer-review" has been the age-old complaint that everyone spouts, the heated interchange between wikipedia and brittanica illustrate that while wikipedia review could use some partitioning of reliable vs. possibly unreliable sources (i.e. advogato-style "poster accreditation"), it is harder and harder to dismiss a more "democratic" process of doing science merely out-of-hand.
Personally, I find it's damned frustrating to try and publish a scientific paper in a substantial journal that flatly refuses to even send my manuscript to a reviewer because I'm basically the equivalent of a "n00b" in a particular specialty.
I was making a joke. hence the ":)" :)
My parent comment is an example of this failure, how ironic
The Mir accident was due to human error actually. They try to dock it manually, and the operator miscalculated the lateral course deviation, because he was only relying on the one dimensional radar beacon.
you can adapt something like a laboratory information management system (LIMS) package to fit your requirements.
So if everything gets published , how can you tell what is useful and what is crap?
:)
slasdot-style moderation!
-1 This is wrong, everyone knows that.
+1 This is right, everyone knows that.
Or, a wikipedia-type system, where everyone can review the article, and everyone else can read the reviews and decide for themselves.
"Traditional" academic journals actually get very little money from commercial advertising. Many specialized field journals have been using "pay for play" models well before the Internet came along. With these journals, such as the Journal of Immunology, each article usually bears the following disclaimer:
The cost of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
I have been through the manuscript submission process and you have to pay big bucks once your paper is accepted for publication: $200 per article if you have supplemental information (material that doesn't fit in the manuscript but still published), $70 per printed page, and $325 per color figure for printing a Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences article. If you want to allow your article on Open Access, you'll need to pony up another $750-$1000 dollars.
This would be like implementing a sort of "statute of limitations" on patent violations. If the patent holder does nothing about violations of a patent after x years, then nobody can be sued for requesting royalties for using that patent. Now, your point #3 is a bit too forceful though, because finding out if a consortium member holds a patent on a key technology component is not difficult to do by other parties involved (by difficult meaning search space is already narrowed to the consortium member and that you only have to task your IP lawyers to find if say Rambus and the other 10 or so other companies hold any outstanding patents on the technology).