How are they differentiating between the confidence levels from the period of 1600 to 1900(prior to instruments measurement) and the pre-1600's? Isn't the same methodology, data set used for both? Or are they drawing from a variey of sources for an overall picture?
A quick point. BJ teams not only take money from the casino they also take money from other players. When the deck is 'hot', having another player sit in drains the +EV out of the deck more quickly. The non-team players have already sat through the -EV portion of the deck, but now they are not getting their 'fair share' of the +EV portion of it. Not saying that BJ teams are unethical, but just pointing out an often overlooked aspect of it.
Is it cheating? Using bots might be against the TOS, but whether it is cheating(or rather unethical) IMHO is highly subjective. Or are you the type of person that would not transfer an OEM license to another computer?
The belief in AGW rests on two pillars: Historic Temperature reconstruction and computer models of climate(even these two things are not independent of each other...many of the latter are baselined by the former). Temperarture reconstruction are mainly done through proxies(tree rings, ice cores...etc). They rely on heavily on statistical tools to merge all avaiable data and pretty much does an extropolation on extrapolated data. How accurate can this be? Not sure since there hasn't been any fund to see if proxies match up with recent instrumental data Link.
As for the computer models...water vapor is considered the primary AGW gas by far and we cannot even come close to properly modelling it. So how accurate can these models be?
the congressman is parroting criticisms from a certain Canadian gadfly who has been proven on several occasions not to be well educated on matters of physical climatology.
The Canadian however is well educated on the subject of statistical analysis. The debate centers on the statistical validity of MHB 98 paper. Even if you don't know a damn thing about climate, you can still check the correctness of the math.
Opponents of the scientific consensus, being political rather than scientific, decided this was an opportunity.
Science is not a democracy. Many of the sciences that rely heavily on advance statistical tools can easily fall victim to Cargo Cult Science.
Although the letter seems to be out of line on a few issues, any close examination in the area of climate science will reveal its messiness. Mann could have blown all this away if only he revealed his source code so others can audit the work.
It is a bit ironic that many of the criticism of Barton even within the same thread uses the above "false" methodology looking at his own political funding.
Only the first problem pertains to game theory. The 2nd problem is a probability/statistic problem and is a crippled version of the Envelope Paradox. The third problem is another probability problem known as the Monty Hall problem. It can turn into a game theory problem if the host is able to decide whether or not to offer the switch.
Most of the posters are missing the whole essence of poker. Poker is a non-cooperative multiway game of incomplete information. The whole point of the game is to create a mixing strategy(which bluffing is a part of) that gives you positive expectation over your opponents mixing strategy. A good mixing stratgey leaks little information about your hand, while at the same time adapts to exploit information leakage from your opponents. There is a question of whether there exists an optimal strategy for multiway poker(there is one for headsup), where your strategy needs not adapt to your opponents and any deviation by your opponent from the optimal strategy creates negative EV. I conject there isn't since it seems intuitively there is a different equilibrium for tight, passive game compare with loose aggressive games. Or in other words, a group of 3 players or more themselves can move the equilibrium point.
I would assume it would use some type of Dignature Signature mechanism. The store would give it some text that signifies the purchase, the card would create a signature from the text, then the merchant would dial somewhere to get the public key and be able to verify it.
But thats not how it works now. The long term interest of shareholders should be what the senior management should strive for. But in today corporations shareholders interest comes in 3rd. Senior management first real goal is to inflate short term profits so their options and bonuses kick in. However after awhile, alot of companies falter on this steroid type of mentality, then management work out deals to save the bondholders. Shareholders are suppose to have power through the board of directors who are supppose to be independant of senior management. Unfortunately, those two groups are conflated in modern times so the shareholder interests are only a secondary concern.
It is not obvious whether downloading a copyright works that you already purchased does or does not constitute fair use. Why would the method of backup creation come into play?
They would have the date of the download, but not the date of the copyright purchase. If they cannot prove that you did not own a copy at the time of download, then serious doubt is created.
Even though RIAA has played alot of lip service on the illegality of downloading, from their actions so far from not going after downloaders, you can probably infer that they do not want to test issue in court. Seems like they are playing it safe and going after people who violations of copyright laws are not in serious doubt.
For Kazaa, they probably go after people who have the number of available files above a certain threshold. This is the best bang for the buck for them. And many P2P clients allow searches with a "username" parameter or find other files shared by current user.
For BT, they probably will just go after the tracker sites. It is too effort consuming find how many particular shares any individual user has available.
There is a non-zero chance that the downloader owns an actual copy of the CD. Or if not, can easily go purchase the item in case if they get slapped with a lawsuit. Creating a backup copy is considered fair use and it would be hard for the RIAA to prove the date of purchase of the copyrighted material. I am sure they would go after downloaders themselves if it wasn't for this "loophole".
However uploaders can be easily shown not to have a license to distrubute the copyrighted works.
Before stating how you believe that Global Warming is true, demonstrate your knowledge of the area by describing, briefly, the three of the following five things:
i) The propagation mechanism for Rossby Waves ii) The primary sources of deep water formation in the Atlantic iii) How a western boundary current is formed iv) What Meddies are. v) What a pycnocline is.
If you can't, you don't know anything about climate dynamics, and you're not smart, you're just recycling someone else's opinion. [ Reply to This ]
If you read the
Official Report
on the investigation of voting irregularities and possible disfranchisement, there were various reported incidents but none involved the felon list. Most of the incidents seem like they were a result of misregistration. Not one witness came forward to say that they were prevented from voting because of the felon list. And a final thought about the correlation between incidents and skin color is that the sample space may be skewed, because if a white person is prevented from voting, it is not highly probable that they would blame racism for it, and hence be far less likely to report it. Not saying a deliberate and systematic effort to disenfranchise a certain demograhic didn't happen, but I doubt it. A plan of this scale would need be in the hands of more clever and compentent folks.
I understand why people spout off about the felon list, it does make for a better sound bite.
It is quite obvious that the democrats are too short sighted on fiscal issues and republicans are too controlling on social issues. Sadly both are influenced by whoever gives them the most money(Few exceptions...McCain,Feingold). Both parties tend to oversimplify the issues. Nothing short of the rise of different parties will rid this nation duopoly on government. How in the world is it possible that the population for the most part only have two strains of political thought?
Do not vote Democrat just for the sake of voting Democrat. It would be too ridiculous.
This is not an unresolvable problem at all; this is where web of trust comes in. The basic idea is for the publisher to sign the checksum using his or her private key. Others can then verify the signature using the publishers public key. This allows me to verify, using only a few bytes of information, that a publisher named SecretAgent did indeed publish a file. If I know that SecretAgent has previously published a lot of "good" files, then the file is probably good. If I don't have any experience with SecretAgent, but I do know that PrivateBenji is trustworthy, and PrivateBenji vouches for SecretAgent, then the file is probably good.
There is nothing to prevent the bad client to send a copy of somebody's elses signature of the file's checksum. Public Key Authentication is used to verify whether already received data is actually from so and so. It cannot be used to authenticate not yet sent data.
The web of trust would fragment the P2P networks to disjointed sections. Don't fool yourself into thinking that once one of these sections gets large enough, the RIAA,MPAA will not be able to infiltrate these (trade good copies of 'In the Army Now' and 'Chairman of the Board' to get their agent rankings up), or easier yet, shut down the highest 'modded' publishers.
Slashdot folks seem to play the role of the Dilbert boss when it comes to social issues. They expect the best of both worlds. They want uncompromising individual freedom and privacy, but at the same time expect the government to prevent bad stuff from happening to them. They set unreasonable expectations with unrealistic constraints and cry foul when government errs wrong on either side. They only seem to realize the existence of tradeoffs only in software projects and not within society. Its quite amusing in a sad clown sort of way.
Slashdot Mirror
How are they differentiating between the confidence levels from the period of 1600 to 1900(prior to instruments measurement) and the pre-1600's? Isn't the same methodology, data set used for both? Or are they drawing from a variey of sources for an overall picture?
A quick point. BJ teams not only take money from the casino they also take money from other players. When the deck is 'hot', having another player sit in drains the +EV out of the deck more quickly. The non-team players have already sat through the -EV portion of the deck, but now they are not getting their 'fair share' of the +EV portion of it. Not saying that BJ teams are unethical, but just pointing out an often overlooked aspect of it.
Is it cheating? Using bots might be against the TOS, but whether it is cheating(or rather unethical) IMHO is highly subjective. Or are you the type of person that would not transfer an OEM license to another computer?
The belief in AGW rests on two pillars: Historic Temperature reconstruction and computer models of climate(even these two things are not independent of each other...many of the latter are baselined by the former). Temperarture reconstruction are mainly done through proxies(tree rings, ice cores...etc). They rely on heavily on statistical tools to merge all avaiable data and pretty much does an extropolation on extrapolated data. How accurate can this be? Not sure since there hasn't been any fund to see if proxies match up with recent instrumental data Link.
As for the computer models...water vapor is considered the primary AGW gas by far and we cannot even come close to properly modelling it. So how accurate can these models be?
the congressman is parroting criticisms from a certain Canadian gadfly who has been proven on several occasions not to be well educated on matters of physical climatology.
The Canadian however is well educated on the subject of statistical analysis. The debate centers on the statistical validity of MHB 98 paper. Even if you don't know a damn thing about climate, you can still check the correctness of the math.
Opponents of the scientific consensus, being political rather than scientific, decided this was an opportunity.
Science is not a democracy. Many of the sciences that rely heavily on advance statistical tools can easily fall victim to Cargo Cult Science.
Although the letter seems to be out of line on a few issues, any close examination in the area of climate science will reveal its messiness. Mann could have blown all this away if only he revealed his source code so others can audit the work.
It is a bit ironic that many of the criticism of Barton even within the same thread uses the above "false" methodology looking at his own political funding.
Only the first problem pertains to game theory. The 2nd problem is a probability/statistic problem and is a crippled version of the Envelope Paradox. The third problem is another probability problem known as the Monty Hall problem. It can turn into a game theory problem if the host is able to decide whether or not to offer the switch.
Most of the posters are missing the whole essence of poker. Poker is a non-cooperative multiway game of incomplete information. The whole point of the game is to create a mixing strategy(which bluffing is a part of) that gives you positive expectation over your opponents mixing strategy. A good mixing stratgey leaks little information about your hand, while at the same time adapts to exploit information leakage from your opponents. There is a question of whether there exists an optimal strategy for multiway poker(there is one for headsup), where your strategy needs not adapt to your opponents and any deviation by your opponent from the optimal strategy creates negative EV. I conject there isn't since it seems intuitively there is a different equilibrium for tight, passive game compare with loose aggressive games. Or in other words, a group of 3 players or more themselves can move the equilibrium point.
I would assume it would use some type of Dignature Signature mechanism. The store would give it some text that signifies the purchase, the card would create a signature from the text, then the merchant would dial somewhere to get the public key and be able to verify it.
But thats not how it works now. The long term interest of shareholders should be what the senior management should strive for. But in today corporations shareholders interest comes in 3rd. Senior management first real goal is to inflate short term profits so their options and bonuses kick in. However after awhile, alot of companies falter on this steroid type of mentality, then management work out deals to save the bondholders. Shareholders are suppose to have power through the board of directors who are supppose to be independant of senior management. Unfortunately, those two groups are conflated in modern times so the shareholder interests are only a secondary concern.
It is not obvious whether downloading a copyright works that you already purchased does or does not constitute fair use. Why would the method of backup creation come into play?
They would have the date of the download, but not the date of the copyright purchase. If they cannot prove that you did not own a copy at the time of download, then serious doubt is created.
Even though RIAA has played alot of lip service on the illegality of downloading, from their actions so far from not going after downloaders, you can probably infer that they do not want to test issue in court. Seems like they are playing it safe and going after people who violations of copyright laws are not in serious doubt.
This website gives you an aggregate rating of people who have similar tastes with your own.
http://movielens.umn.edu/
For Kazaa, they probably go after people who have the number of available files above a certain threshold. This is the best bang for the buck for them. And many P2P clients allow searches with a "username" parameter or find other files shared by current user.
For BT, they probably will just go after the tracker sites. It is too effort consuming find how many particular shares any individual user has available.
There is a non-zero chance that the downloader owns an actual copy of the CD. Or if not, can easily go purchase the item in case if they get slapped with a lawsuit. Creating a backup copy is considered fair use and it would be hard for the RIAA to prove the date of purchase of the copyrighted material. I am sure they would go after downloaders themselves if it wasn't for this "loophole".
However uploaders can be easily shown not to have a license to distrubute the copyrighted works.
Before stating how you believe that Global Warming is true, demonstrate your knowledge of the area by describing, briefly, the three of the following five things :
i) The propagation mechanism for Rossby Waves
ii) The primary sources of deep water formation in the Atlantic
iii) How a western boundary current is formed
iv) What Meddies are.
v) What a pycnocline is.
If you can't, you don't know anything about climate dynamics, and you're not smart, you're just recycling someone else's opinion.
[ Reply to This ]
there is a somewhere.
If you read the Official Report on the investigation of voting irregularities and possible disfranchisement, there were various reported incidents but none involved the felon list. Most of the incidents seem like they were a result of misregistration. Not one witness came forward to say that they were prevented from voting because of the felon list. And a final thought about the correlation between incidents and skin color is that the sample space may be skewed, because if a white person is prevented from voting, it is not highly probable that they would blame racism for it, and hence be far less likely to report it. Not saying a deliberate and systematic effort to disenfranchise a certain demograhic didn't happen, but I doubt it. A plan of this scale would need be in the hands of more clever and compentent folks. I understand why people spout off about the felon list, it does make for a better sound bite.
Old news on slashdot. Check out this comment:
Link
This story was on slashdot over a month ago.
Check out this comment:
Link
Its not a lie if you believe the lie.
Vote 3rd Party
It is quite obvious that the democrats are too short sighted on fiscal issues and republicans are too controlling on social issues. Sadly both are influenced by whoever gives them the most money(Few exceptions...McCain,Feingold). Both parties tend to oversimplify the issues. Nothing short of the rise of different parties will rid this nation duopoly on government. How in the world is it possible that the population for the most part only have two strains of political thought?
Do not vote Democrat just for the sake of voting Democrat. It would be too ridiculous.
This is not an unresolvable problem at all; this is where web of trust comes in. The basic idea is for the publisher to sign the checksum using his or her private key. Others can then verify the signature using the publishers public key. This allows me to verify, using only a few bytes of information, that a publisher named SecretAgent did indeed publish a file. If I know that SecretAgent has previously published a lot of "good" files, then the file is probably good. If I don't have any experience with SecretAgent, but I do know that PrivateBenji is trustworthy, and PrivateBenji vouches for SecretAgent, then the file is probably good.
There is nothing to prevent the bad client to send a copy of somebody's elses signature of the file's checksum. Public Key Authentication is used to verify whether already received data is actually from so and so. It cannot be used to authenticate not yet sent data.
The web of trust would fragment the P2P networks to disjointed sections. Don't fool yourself into thinking that once one of these sections gets large enough, the RIAA,MPAA will not be able to infiltrate these (trade good copies of 'In the Army Now' and 'Chairman of the Board' to get their agent rankings up), or easier yet, shut down the highest 'modded' publishers.
Slashdot folks seem to play the role of the Dilbert boss when it comes to social issues. They expect the best of both worlds. They want uncompromising individual freedom and privacy, but at the same time expect the government to prevent bad stuff from happening to them. They set unreasonable expectations with unrealistic constraints and cry foul when government errs wrong on either side. They only seem to realize the existence of tradeoffs only in software projects and not within society. Its quite amusing in a sad clown sort of way.
If you look at the byline it was a WSJ article.
This subject might break the record for most comments...not surprising when you mix Katz and a subject that almost writes its own punchlines.