This, and also having a full replica of the whole rover on Earth to double check that any software updates won't screw the whole operation. But I can't imagine they are not doing these already:?
In my experience, broadly speaking, great things happen to outstanding students. It is tempting to fantasize that mediocre students can still get great jobs, but don't be fooled -- in practice straight A's will get you into any company of your choosing. For the rest, it will be an uphill battle.
I'm also assuming you are not a troll. I would still like you to point specific examples of what in these 10 minutes stems from the author's ignorance on the subjects of sex and violence. Not trolling, just wondering what points I missed.
Thanks for the recommendations though.
You are off with this idea that citations are just a way to pay homage. They are very important. And you want to remove citations after the author has gone through the great effort of reviewing other people's work, comparing their ideas, etc? That makes no sense.
The very particular case you point of citations to old well-known papers is pretty irrelevant, and unrelated to the problem that TFA is discussing. While that might be purely homage, what is the big problem of giving credit to a given researcher if your work is based on theirs? Nobody got thousands of citations by coercing others into citing their papers.
Including copious references is not only a way to "pay homage to existing academics". It makes sure that you went through the literature to see if your contribution is really a novelty, and forces you to compare your work against others', which is great both for the expert in the field to better understand your contribution, and for the non-expert, who gets pointers to better grasp some parts or to navigate towards the important papers of a field of research. These are still very important, even if you think your work is technically sound.
I'm talking out of my ass now, and it depends on the research area and the paper, but "It needs more references if you want to get published" might be a polite way for your acquaintances to say, have you provided sufficient motivation for the problem you are solving, thoroughly explored the literature for related proposals, you should compare your ideas against other papers', etc.
I see all those serious comments. Really, can't you see?
"For too long, we've pretended that the old problem of causality can be cured by our shiny new knowledge." I know several guys who have chosen to stay as ignorant as possible. None of them have solved the problem of causality. "If only we devote more resources to research or dissect the system at a more fundamental level or search for ever more subtle correlations, we can discover how it all works." no shit, how could somebody get the idea that observing a phenomenon can help you gain insights on it, sooo flawed "But a cause is not a fact, and it never will be; the things we can see will always be bracketed by what we cannot." combines a well known phylosophical problem with a nice tautology, which always contributes a lot of meaning "And this is why, even when we know everything about everything, we'll still be telling stories about why it happened. It's mystery all the way down." what the fuck does that even mean, that is one real mistery to me
Science does not have any problem. Science systematically tries to prove itself wrong, it is a fundamental part of science that makes it so awesome that it is used even to build churches.
A few years back, you could have written something of that sort: Amazon's infrastructure is so small that it won't be able to handle the volume of a large book vendor. You get what I mean? Give it time, if it does gain some adoption, it will become something mindbogglingly huge.
Right, just like death threats over traditional mail. Nobody is forced to even open the envelope, let alone read the letter, so why bother? Makes sense!
Using euphemisms to describe a situation is quite different from being polite when talking to somebody, though. 'Requested' would describe the situation much more precisely. Still, in this particular case this imprecision is not so important, given that in the situation being described, the reader can already imagine the guy did not have much of a choice.
You don't seem to value people's life much. I'd take dealing with a few jerks now and then over innocents dying. And additionally I don't think jerks deserve death. Actually thinking jerks deserve to die and take collateral damage with them is pretty jerkish. Let's have a duel?:-)
You seriously think it is right to have a 50% death toll on such conflicts? Unless by a fight you mean a bare fist fight, in which case I can't see how having a society where Mike Tyson is always right is good in any way.
Absolutely. Too many people are overly worried about their expertise on some programming language, database, operating system, you name it. But who cares! These are just the tools you will use to do your thing. It is much more valuable to think in these terms: 'I know these languages, and I am particularly good with this one. That said, what actual programming language I end up coding in is just an implementation detail.' What you want to be valued for is your ability to solve such and such problems. Of course you are familiar with the tools you will require for that.
Seriously? Name the one company that is most likely (as in almost certainly) behind all this. I really can't find an alternative to apple. While there is no 100% certainty, you can't dismiss it as "nonsense"!
... at least to some extent; this is further evidence. It must feel pretty bad for some that crooks understand bitcoin so much better than the blindfolded "bitcoin is a ponzi scheme" haters. Then of course bitcoin has its problems, but it is so seldom that bitcoin critic posts make informed points.
You miss my point, which is precisely that truly innocent people might enter the list and become new victims of this nonsense. And, while I wan't pity the guilty ones, I still believe they have the right to a fair trial, and a punishment in accordance to their level of involvement in drug related violence. If you can't agree with this principle, you don't really agree with pretty much any "western democracy" (I know this label is flawed but I couldn't find a better one).
$5000/day makes almost 2 million per year, am I vastly underestimating the amount of money WikiLeaks needs? Also, how many bones did you break last time you crashed veeeerrry slooooowly?
Slashdot Mirror
This, and also having a full replica of the whole rover on Earth to double check that any software updates won't screw the whole operation. But I can't imagine they are not doing these already :?
In my experience, broadly speaking, great things happen to outstanding students. It is tempting to fantasize that mediocre students can still get great jobs, but don't be fooled -- in practice straight A's will get you into any company of your choosing. For the rest, it will be an uphill battle.
I'm also assuming you are not a troll. I would still like you to point specific examples of what in these 10 minutes stems from the author's ignorance on the subjects of sex and violence. Not trolling, just wondering what points I missed. Thanks for the recommendations though.
Care to elaborate, with specific examples? I'm very curious and hopefully your points will not remain unsubstantiated.
Well yes, publishing is some sort of test. That's the point of peer review.
You are off with this idea that citations are just a way to pay homage. They are very important. And you want to remove citations after the author has gone through the great effort of reviewing other people's work, comparing their ideas, etc? That makes no sense.
The very particular case you point of citations to old well-known papers is pretty irrelevant, and unrelated to the problem that TFA is discussing. While that might be purely homage, what is the big problem of giving credit to a given researcher if your work is based on theirs? Nobody got thousands of citations by coercing others into citing their papers.
Including copious references is not only a way to "pay homage to existing academics". It makes sure that you went through the literature to see if your contribution is really a novelty, and forces you to compare your work against others', which is great both for the expert in the field to better understand your contribution, and for the non-expert, who gets pointers to better grasp some parts or to navigate towards the important papers of a field of research. These are still very important, even if you think your work is technically sound.
I'm talking out of my ass now, and it depends on the research area and the paper, but "It needs more references if you want to get published" might be a polite way for your acquaintances to say, have you provided sufficient motivation for the problem you are solving, thoroughly explored the literature for related proposals, you should compare your ideas against other papers', etc.
I see all those serious comments. Really, can't you see?
"For too long, we've pretended that the old problem of causality can be cured by our shiny new knowledge." I know several guys who have chosen to stay as ignorant as possible. None of them have solved the problem of causality. "If only we devote more resources to research or dissect the system at a more fundamental level or search for ever more subtle correlations, we can discover how it all works." no shit, how could somebody get the idea that observing a phenomenon can help you gain insights on it, sooo flawed "But a cause is not a fact, and it never will be; the things we can see will always be bracketed by what we cannot." combines a well known phylosophical problem with a nice tautology, which always contributes a lot of meaning "And this is why, even when we know everything about everything, we'll still be telling stories about why it happened. It's mystery all the way down." what the fuck does that even mean, that is one real mistery to me
Science does not have any problem. Science systematically tries to prove itself wrong, it is a fundamental part of science that makes it so awesome that it is used even to build churches.
A few years back, you could have written something of that sort: Amazon's infrastructure is so small that it won't be able to handle the volume of a large book vendor. You get what I mean? Give it time, if it does gain some adoption, it will become something mindbogglingly huge.
Right, just like death threats over traditional mail. Nobody is forced to even open the envelope, let alone read the letter, so why bother? Makes sense!
Using euphemisms to describe a situation is quite different from being polite when talking to somebody, though. 'Requested' would describe the situation much more precisely. Still, in this particular case this imprecision is not so important, given that in the situation being described, the reader can already imagine the guy did not have much of a choice.
+5... funny? Wrong modding guys. This is very sharp criticism at its best.
In before politicians start wearing gloves.
You don't seem to value people's life much. I'd take dealing with a few jerks now and then over innocents dying. And additionally I don't think jerks deserve death. Actually thinking jerks deserve to die and take collateral damage with them is pretty jerkish. Let's have a duel? :-)
You seriously think it is right to have a 50% death toll on such conflicts? Unless by a fight you mean a bare fist fight, in which case I can't see how having a society where Mike Tyson is always right is good in any way.
Absolutely. Too many people are overly worried about their expertise on some programming language, database, operating system, you name it. But who cares! These are just the tools you will use to do your thing. It is much more valuable to think in these terms: 'I know these languages, and I am particularly good with this one. That said, what actual programming language I end up coding in is just an implementation detail.' What you want to be valued for is your ability to solve such and such problems. Of course you are familiar with the tools you will require for that.
Well at least you posted as AC.
Seriously? Name the one company that is most likely (as in almost certainly) behind all this. I really can't find an alternative to apple. While there is no 100% certainty, you can't dismiss it as "nonsense"!
Great, I will def try it. Thank you for the link.
Perhaps this can be achieved with some plug-in. But really, editing code in eclipse is very painful for me. Vim mode would be awesome!
... at least to some extent; this is further evidence. It must feel pretty bad for some that crooks understand bitcoin so much better than the blindfolded "bitcoin is a ponzi scheme" haters. Then of course bitcoin has its problems, but it is so seldom that bitcoin critic posts make informed points.
You miss my point, which is precisely that truly innocent people might enter the list and become new victims of this nonsense. And, while I wan't pity the guilty ones, I still believe they have the right to a fair trial, and a punishment in accordance to their level of involvement in drug related violence. If you can't agree with this principle, you don't really agree with pretty much any "western democracy" (I know this label is flawed but I couldn't find a better one).
Right, because no innocents will wrongfully enter the list, ever. No need for fair trials.
$5000/day makes almost 2 million per year, am I vastly underestimating the amount of money WikiLeaks needs? Also, how many bones did you break last time you crashed veeeerrry slooooowly?