I know because I gamble online. I tried to buy-in using my credit card -- doesn't work because the credit card companies *already* block charges to online gambling companies. Instead I funnel my money through PayPal or something similar, and everything works fine. I don't see how this law will change anything.
The only hope is that most schools end up with a small crew of truely gifted educators, the sort of folks who know when to ignore the rules and when not to, and are actually passionate about their topics, and that makes the experiance slightly bearable.
The majority of schools will not aquire such a core of "truely gifted educators" until school teachers are paid salaries which reflect those expectations. Only when teachers are accorded the same salary and respect -- and subject to the same rigorous standards -- as lawyers, doctors, and other trained professonals, will your hope be realized.
I know that many on slashdot have as little respect for the Democrats as for Republicans, and most slashdotters are very carefull to make clear that their rants apply equally for both parties. But the fact of the matter is, Bush's executive branch is the chief arcitect of the post-9/11 erosion of our civil rights. Are some Republican Senators and Representatives good people that you want in office? Well sure, but they have to tow the party line or they won't get funding from the Republican party and they won't get reelected. Thus a vote for a Republican is a vote for Tom Delay and Bill Frist. And what is the Republican leadership's agenda? To support George Bush in all his endevors, and to stifle Congressional dissent.
The plain fact is that most effective way to curtail Bush's power and protect what left of the Bill of Right is to elect a democratic Senate and House this november. If the Dems regain controll of even one house of Congress, we can hope that the legislative branch will start to do more than simply rubber stamp the executive branch's whims.
You may hate the democratic party, you may usually vote for 3rd parties or Republicans or not vote at all, but if you want to check the power of the executive branch,then suck it up and vote for a Democrat.
"This sort of technology does protect against a real threat," says Jeffrey Ullman, professor emeritus of computer science at Stanford University. "If a computer suspects me of being a terrorist, but just says maybe an analyst should look at it... well, that's no big deal. This is the type of thing we need to be willing to do, to give up a certain amount of privacy."
This is not something "we" need to be willing to do!
My civil liberties are NOT YOURS TO GIVE AWAY! I'm terrified that a CS prof at Stanford thinks that it's no big deal that the US wants to spy on its own citizens and deprive us of our rights under the 4th and 5th amendments. (Yes, the 5th ammendment too, since US Citizens have been held on US soil without being charged with a crime, and thus deprived of due process of law.)
How can any educated person think this loss of privacy is "no big deal"? I'm at a loss for words.
1) Autistic savants are not "mathematical geniuses" as TFA claims. Rather, they have an incredible facility with numbers and can perform computations at mind bogglings speeds. However, this does not make savants good at math any more than a calculator is good at math. Mathematicians (and NSA employess) do not sit around all day multiplying numbers or reciting digits of Pi.
2) Even if a savant's abilities were useful, the NSA would never give one a security clearance. For example, can you imagine an autistic person agreeing to take, or passing, a polygraph? (By law, anyone with top secret clearance in the US must pass a polygraph.)
Many of the better code-breakers in history were experts or idiot-savants who "specialized" in the structure of information.
Do you have an example or a source for this claim?
I already have a Centrino laptop running linux. All this announcement means, I guess, is that now manufacturers can sell centrino laptops with linux pre-installed. But since most linux users just buy the laptop they want, and then put the OS they want on it, I don't see what difference this announcement makes.
Why can't solar-powered cars be built using modern safety technology? What do seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, etc have to do with the type of fuel the car uses?
I suppose that in many head-on collisions, the mass of the engine itself does a great deal to protect the driver. But surely solar-powered cars can be more massive?
Re:Interesting Military Application
on
Ready, Aim, HACK!
·
· Score: 1
If deployed in the field, special ops soldiers can approach a terrorist safehouse, and activate this device to hack into any cell phone that may be vulnerable. Then they could simply listen in on the safehouse without ever being even 500 feet away, and can discern their movement if necessary.
Instead of putting troops at risk on the ground trying to hack an individual phone, our intelligence community can just intercept the communication once it reaches a cell tower or satilite. Indeed, intercepted phone messages are a mainstay of the US government's signals intelligence program.
By the time special forces are there on the ground, they aren't going to be using their rifles for hacking.
Yes, based on the/. review alone, I am a bit worried about the acuracy of this book. For example: [DFW is] especially careful to steer us away from thinking that infinity is just a really large number
In fact, the various infinite cardinal and ordinal numbers can be thought of as numbers, in a way that is not difficult to make mathematically precise. From the review, it seems like DFW focuses on how myserious and abstract infinity must be, rather than on the mathematical details of how various infinite numbers can be defined.
As a mathematician (all right I'm still in grad school), I think that DFW is doing infinity a diservice by making it seem so hard. If you're willing to work out the mathematical details, infinite numbers aren't any more mysterious than finite ones.
I didn't see the Oscars, but did Jackson actually imply that LOTR is awkwardly written and "dead"? From the article:
"I especially just lastly want to thank our wonderful cast who just got their tongues around this rather awkward text and made it come to life with such devotion and passion and heart," said "Lord of the Rings" director Peter Jackson...
Jackson said this in his acceptance speach for best adapted sceenplay. Thus he was speaking in a self-depreciating manner about his own script, not about Tolkien.
If you RTFA, you will see that Microsoft is not paying for what's free to apple. From the article:
Marketing experts... argue that the practice [of imbedding products] is legitimate because networks are prohibited from accepting money for product placements, and directors like having actual products in their shows because it makes the programs seem more authentic.
Product placement is much more of a tacit agreement, a vicious circle whereby the show seems cooler becasue it features the product, and the product seems cooler because it's in the show. Or at least that's how the marketers of both hope things will work out.
The article goes on to mention that sometimes companies agree to buy lots of advertising time in return for product placement, but giving explicit payment for placement is against the law.
Don't forget about the military's IT department. The NSA employs tens of thousands of mathematicians and computer scientists. For the world's most secretive organization, the NSA's webpage is remarkably forthright about what they do -- protect American IT and aquire the IT of others.
what IS the difference between using a GPS device to track someone and just following him around?
According to the nyt article, the ruling states that a warrant is required to attach a GPS device to a suspect's vehicle. I think there is a clear philosophical (and constitutional) difference between following someone around a placing an electronic bug on their car. Thus this ruling is not just about privacy, but also about the sanctity of private property.
As surveilence technology becomes more prevelant and more sophisticated, this ruling may be an important precedent indeed.
Essays have two aspects, spelling/grammar, and content.
Right now the computer can grade the technical side of a paper, and the teacher can grade the creative side.
RTFA! Criteria does not merely grade spelling and grammer. Rather, it has a database of 500 papers graded by humans, and the program uses statisical analysis to compare a given paper to those in its database.
If a paper uses the right technical terms, contains phrases similar to those in "A" papers, and uses phrases like "thus", "because" and "in conclusion" which suggest a logical flow, then the paper gets an A.
However, you are right that Criteria grades based on form rather than on content. As anyone who reads usenet can tell you, it is quite possible for a paper to have the form of coherent argument, to use the right buzzwords, but in fact not contain a logical or persuasive argument.
Criteria is indeed flawed, but not in the way that you suggest. Rather than check spelling and grammer, it checks for the appearance of an argument. As well all know, merely looking like a good argument isn't good enough.
When did the X consortium start using the term "X Window System" to describe X?
In the nytimes article, Bill Gates is paraphrased as saying:
Mr. Gates said that unlike most competing products in the early 1980's, which were simple window systems, Windows is a layer of software between an operating system and an application like a word processor.
Doesn't X do the same thing? And if so, isn't this an example of someone else using the word "windows" to refer to a GUI before Microsoft?
Slashdot Mirror
I know because I gamble online. I tried to buy-in using my credit card -- doesn't work because the credit card companies *already* block charges to online gambling companies. Instead I funnel my money through PayPal or something similar, and everything works fine. I don't see how this law will change anything.
The only hope is that most schools end up with a small crew of truely gifted educators, the sort of folks who know when to ignore the rules and when not to, and are actually passionate about their topics, and that makes the experiance slightly bearable.
The majority of schools will not aquire such a core of "truely gifted educators" until school teachers are paid salaries which reflect those expectations. Only when teachers are accorded the same salary and respect -- and subject to the same rigorous standards -- as lawyers, doctors, and other trained professonals, will your hope be realized.
The plain fact is that most effective way to curtail Bush's power and protect what left of the Bill of Right is to elect a democratic Senate and House this november. If the Dems regain controll of even one house of Congress, we can hope that the legislative branch will start to do more than simply rubber stamp the executive branch's whims.
You may hate the democratic party, you may usually vote for 3rd parties or Republicans or not vote at all, but if you want to check the power of the executive branch,then suck it up and vote for a Democrat.
This is not something "we" need to be willing to do! My civil liberties are NOT YOURS TO GIVE AWAY! I'm terrified that a CS prof at Stanford thinks that it's no big deal that the US wants to spy on its own citizens and deprive us of our rights under the 4th and 5th amendments. (Yes, the 5th ammendment too, since US Citizens have been held on US soil without being charged with a crime, and thus deprived of due process of law.)
How can any educated person think this loss of privacy is "no big deal"? I'm at a loss for words.
She could apply to the NSA as a code-breaker.
No, she couldn't.
1) Autistic savants are not "mathematical geniuses" as TFA claims. Rather, they have an incredible facility with numbers and can perform computations at mind bogglings speeds. However, this does not make savants good at math any more than a calculator is good at math. Mathematicians (and NSA employess) do not sit around all day multiplying numbers or reciting digits of Pi.
2) Even if a savant's abilities were useful, the NSA would never give one a security clearance. For example, can you imagine an autistic person agreeing to take, or passing, a polygraph? (By law, anyone with top secret clearance in the US must pass a polygraph.)
Many of the better code-breakers in history were experts or idiot-savants who "specialized" in the structure of information.
Do you have an example or a source for this claim?
I already have a Centrino laptop running linux. All this announcement means, I guess, is that now manufacturers can sell centrino laptops with linux pre-installed. But since most linux users just buy the laptop they want, and then put the OS they want on it, I don't see what difference this announcement makes.
Why can't solar-powered cars be built using modern safety technology? What do seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, etc have to do with the type of fuel the car uses?
I suppose that in many head-on collisions, the mass of the engine itself does a great deal to protect the driver. But surely solar-powered cars can be more massive?
If deployed in the field, special ops soldiers can approach a terrorist safehouse, and activate this device to hack into any cell phone that may be vulnerable. Then they could simply listen in on the safehouse without ever being even 500 feet away, and can discern their movement if necessary.
Instead of putting troops at risk on the ground trying to hack an individual phone, our intelligence community can just intercept the communication once it reaches a cell tower or satilite. Indeed, intercepted phone messages are a mainstay of the US government's signals intelligence program.
By the time special forces are there on the ground, they aren't going to be using their rifles for hacking.
Yes, based on the /. review alone, I am a bit worried about the acuracy of this book. For example:
[DFW is] especially careful to steer us away from thinking that infinity is just a really large number
In fact, the various infinite cardinal and ordinal numbers can be thought of as numbers, in a way that is not difficult to make mathematically precise. From the review, it seems like DFW focuses on how myserious and abstract infinity must be, rather than on the mathematical details of how various infinite numbers can be defined.
As a mathematician (all right I'm still in grad school), I think that DFW is doing infinity a diservice by making it seem so hard. If you're willing to work out the mathematical details, infinite numbers aren't any more mysterious than finite ones.
I didn't see the Oscars, but did Jackson actually imply that LOTR is awkwardly written and "dead"? From the article:
"I especially just lastly want to thank our wonderful cast who just got their tongues around this rather awkward text and made it come to life with such devotion and passion and heart," said "Lord of the Rings" director Peter Jackson...
Jackson said this in his acceptance speach for best adapted sceenplay. Thus he was speaking in a self-depreciating manner about his own script, not about Tolkien.
More detailed articles about the research can be found here or here.
Larkin's article itself is here.
Any physics nerds want to explain it to us?
If you RTFA, you will see that Microsoft is not paying for what's free to apple. From the article:
Marketing experts... argue that the practice [of imbedding products] is legitimate because networks are prohibited from accepting money for product placements, and directors like having actual products in their shows because it makes the programs seem more authentic.
Product placement is much more of a tacit agreement, a vicious circle whereby the show seems cooler becasue it features the product, and the product seems cooler because it's in the show. Or at least that's how the marketers of both hope things will work out.
The article goes on to mention that sometimes companies agree to buy lots of advertising time in return for product placement, but giving explicit payment for placement is against the law.
Don't forget about the military's IT department. The NSA employs tens of thousands of mathematicians and computer scientists. For the world's most secretive organization, the NSA's webpage is remarkably forthright about what they do -- protect American IT and aquire the IT of others.
what IS the difference between using a GPS device to track someone and just following him around?
According to the nyt article, the ruling states that a warrant is required to attach a GPS device to a suspect's vehicle. I think there is a clear philosophical (and constitutional) difference between following someone around a placing an electronic bug on their car. Thus this ruling is not just about privacy, but also about the sanctity of private property.
As surveilence technology becomes more prevelant and more sophisticated, this ruling may be an important precedent indeed.
RTFA! Criteria does not merely grade spelling and grammer. Rather, it has a database of 500 papers graded by humans, and the program uses statisical analysis to compare a given paper to those in its database. If a paper uses the right technical terms, contains phrases similar to those in "A" papers, and uses phrases like "thus", "because" and "in conclusion" which suggest a logical flow, then the paper gets an A.
However, you are right that Criteria grades based on form rather than on content. As anyone who reads usenet can tell you, it is quite possible for a paper to have the form of coherent argument, to use the right buzzwords, but in fact not contain a logical or persuasive argument.
Criteria is indeed flawed, but not in the way that you suggest. Rather than check spelling and grammer, it checks for the appearance of an argument. As well all know, merely looking like a good argument isn't good enough.
When did the X consortium start using the term "X Window System" to describe X?
In the nytimes article, Bill Gates is paraphrased as saying:
Mr. Gates said that unlike most competing products in the early 1980's, which were simple window systems, Windows is a layer of software between an operating system and an application like a word processor.
Doesn't X do the same thing? And if so, isn't this an example of someone else using the word "windows" to refer to a GUI before Microsoft?
- Nathaniel