The language is simplified. They're designed for kids and they're designed to entertain, though you'll be missing many of the cultural references.
There is absolutely no point trying to memorize something if you don't use it. It's like trying to hold water in your hands, it'll dribble away in weeks if not months.
Trying to learn any language without being immersed in the culture is extremely difficult. I reckon current language teaching methods are bizarre; defining grammar, memorizing words. No native speaker learns language that way. Learn by example and your brain will build the grammar and vocabulary as it goes. TV/Radio, newspapers, web sites all help and can be downloaded usually. Better, move to China.
The mean is 3 the median is 3. The average is 3. There are no more threes than any other number. The three has no better nor worse quality than any other number because it happens to be the average. Average does not define quality.
The average has nothing to do with bell curves, normal distributions or other kinds of distribution. These distributions do have average values, but only because as I said, any population or set of numbers has by definition, a set of average values.
The other thing is. "The bell curve". Which bell curve? The distribution of which quality of the population are you talking? IQ? Driving skill? Income? Computer literacy? Hours per week on the Internet?
So perhaps what you meant was "mediocre". An adjective denoting the relative quality of something.
On that, I happen to disagree. You think paint colour defines the mediocrity of a vehicle? That sounds more like mediocrity of thought. Japanese cars; Honda, Toyota have quality records that put all the European and American manufacturers to shame. How could a Toyota Prius (or Honda Insight) be called mediocre or middle of the bell curve? The premier military vehicle in the world? Not the Hummvee, but the Toyota Hilux 4x4 pickup. Damned near indestructible and no warlord's army could function without them. The premier 4x4 in Saudi? Toyota Landcruiser because nothing else survives the desert. Camrys could well simply be the "best" vehicles in their class, and if that happens to be the case, the "50th percentile" would likely be buying the best their money could afford.
Disclaimer. I neither own any Toyota products, nor stock/shares in any Toyota business.
there are more people in the 50th percentile, thus we will always have woefully average stuff.
No, you'll always have average stuff because when you have a population of *anything*, the middle of that population is always by definition, average. It has nothing to do with how many of them there are.
Plone and the other suggestions here are all much better at these two than any system built on e-mail.
The requirements are uselessly fuzzy. Neither searchability nor workflow are specifically mentioned, though searchability is implied in "management".
It sounds to me like even MS Exchange with public folders (and therefore just about any IMAP server) could handle the requirements as specified. Signing, authentication, tracking, indexed searching are all bog standard features of any modern email system.
You typically won't get it all in one box with OSS (but could assemble your own) but Microsoft (exchange), IBM (Notes) and a host of others have prepackaged groupware systems based round a core of email. 99% of users never use the encryption, key management, signing, tracking features, but there you go.
The primary benefit is the network effect. Email works everywhere.
These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use. Not because they're particularly dangerous themselves, but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.
People who deal with raw physical measurements (radar engineers, astronomers, the guy who makes airspeed sensor of the B2--er,um...) have had this problem figured out for a while.
It sounds easy to you cos you have an easy job. You only have a single, easy to measure parameter.
In other fields there can be dozens, hundreds or thousands of parameters, each with it's own signal. Determining which of the signals (if any) are meaningful is a lot harder than what you're doing. What I'm saying is, you're an engineer, not a scientist.
Isn't it obvious? Take a look at digital media. The supply can be (basically) infinite, so how much do people value songs at? Nothing. They download them for free.
The value of something is zero if nobody wants to buy it.
When has capitalism worked so efficiently that it produced so much that what it produced cost nothing? Prices don't fall to zero in any system because doing anything requires energy, which necessitates some positive cost.
The value falls to zero. The cost doesn't. i.e. You built it but can't sell it because nobody wants it.
In fact because most money is based on debt. The loan required to make the product which could satisfy the demand is (usually) never made in the first place. The loan requires a profit. If demand has been satisfied, the value is zero and there can't be any profit.
e.g. everlasting light bulbs. Once they've all been made, demand has been satisfied. The value of one too many lightbulbs is zero. Nobody would give the loan which allows you to make that lightbulb because they'll never see a return on their loan.
It is the perception of relative worth that gives money its intrinsic value.
There's no such thing as intrinsic value, only relative value. But you're on the right track. Money itself has some desirable qualities; You can spend it anywhere you want, it doesn't degrade or rot so you can choose when to spend it, or not. Opportunity is a key quality. The desire to have money or the desire to have the goods depends whether you spend the money and buy the goods. If you make money less desirable, it'll be spent faster (Which is why most economists recommend mild inflation). Gesell described a more explicit system of demurrage. A monthly 1% penalty for holding money. Penalising the holding of money separates it's store of value quality from it's medium of exchange quality. It becomes purely a medium of exchange, people pass it on and use other things to store value.
How long does it take to get to the station? How long does it take waiting for your train? How long does it take waiting for connections? How long does it take to get from the station to your destination? How often does the train stop? How long does it spend at 0mph? What does that do to the average speed?
In France and Germany, as well as the UK, rail travel represents a tiny proportion of passenger miles travelled every year. The reality is that in well over 90% of journeys, the train performs very poorly indeed. Which explains the usage statistics with respect to cars.
In Canada, if that person gets into an accident, my taxes are going to pay for his hospital bill. I'm all for saving lives, but I would rather prevent injury before it happens. In this case I worked goddamn hard for my money
The idea that you think this gives you the right to tell me how I should live my life is THE single primary reason that a nationalised health system is a bad idea.
capitalism requires that there be supply and demand. The value of sometthing is related to both. If the supply exceeds the demand, the price falls to zero. This means that for capitalism to function, the demand *must* exceed the supply.
This means you must never build enough houses. You must never grow enough food. You must never make enough clothes, cars, whatever(wealth). This also means there *must* always be poor there *must* always be starving *must* always be unemployment to ensure demand.
We have just seen an example of the supply exceeding demand. It is called a crash. The supply of houses exceeded the demand for them and now, they're literally knocking them down in order to reduce the supply and increase the value of the ones remaining. It's an insane situation.
This is something Silvio Gesell pointed out around 100 years ago. In order to change this, the nature of money itself must be changed.
Then train a bayesian classifier (bogofilter) to answer the questions for you.
You just have to remember Bayesian classifiers are good at yes/no classifications (e.g. spam/notspam), so I have several corpuses and test incoming emails serially against them, tagging with the ones which match. Then process the email according to the tag. FAQ should be fairly easy. Use a procmail rule to answer, "thanks for your question, please have a look here".
Large oil reserves. There is a correlation between oil and domestic political problems. You might even think there are groups trying to sabotage each other.
It's easy to get away with stealing 4-5 dollars, and if you do it often enough you make a tidy profit...
This is the basis of banking. The loans which banks make are essentially, value removed from the existing pot of money. Each loan represents a few fractions of a cent removed from everyone's paycheck &/or bank account.
There is a hypothetical moral question which is commonly asked in psychological personality tests. "If you found a way of stealing a tiny amount of money from everyone, knowing you could never be caught. Would you do it?". Superman III was even about this particular moral question. It's not actually hypothetical, it's how our monetary system works.
The irony of course is that naive parents educate their children that taking something without consent is bad, when actually it's the very core of our society.
Slashdot Mirror
Import Chinese comic books.
The language is simplified. They're designed for kids and they're designed to entertain, though you'll be missing many of the cultural references.
There is absolutely no point trying to memorize something if you don't use it. It's like trying to hold water in your hands, it'll dribble away in weeks if not months.
Trying to learn any language without being immersed in the culture is extremely difficult. I reckon current language teaching methods are bizarre; defining grammar, memorizing words. No native speaker learns language that way. Learn by example and your brain will build the grammar and vocabulary as it goes. TV/Radio, newspapers, web sites all help and can be downloaded usually. Better, move to China.
1 2 3 4 5
The mean is 3 the median is 3. The average is 3. There are no more threes than any other number. The three has no better nor worse quality than any other number because it happens to be the average. Average does not define quality.
The average has nothing to do with bell curves, normal distributions or other kinds of distribution. These distributions do have average values, but only because as I said, any population or set of numbers has by definition, a set of average values.
The other thing is. "The bell curve". Which bell curve? The distribution of which quality of the population are you talking? IQ? Driving skill? Income? Computer literacy? Hours per week on the Internet?
So perhaps what you meant was "mediocre". An adjective denoting the relative quality of something.
On that, I happen to disagree. You think paint colour defines the mediocrity of a vehicle? That sounds more like mediocrity of thought. Japanese cars; Honda, Toyota have quality records that put all the European and American manufacturers to shame. How could a Toyota Prius (or Honda Insight) be called mediocre or middle of the bell curve? The premier military vehicle in the world? Not the Hummvee, but the Toyota Hilux 4x4 pickup. Damned near indestructible and no warlord's army could function without them. The premier 4x4 in Saudi? Toyota Landcruiser because nothing else survives the desert. Camrys could well simply be the "best" vehicles in their class, and if that happens to be the case, the "50th percentile" would likely be buying the best their money could afford.
Disclaimer. I neither own any Toyota products, nor stock/shares in any Toyota business.
he first two domains I block are facebook and myspace.
Blocking by domain is so like... 1999, it's very fail.
there are more people in the 50th percentile, thus we will always have woefully average stuff.
No, you'll always have average stuff because when you have a population of *anything*, the middle of that population is always by definition, average. It has nothing to do with how many of them there are.
Plone and the other suggestions here are all much better at these two than any system built on e-mail.
The requirements are uselessly fuzzy. Neither searchability nor workflow are specifically mentioned, though searchability is implied in "management".
It sounds to me like even MS Exchange with public folders (and therefore just about any IMAP server) could handle the requirements as
specified. Signing, authentication, tracking, indexed searching are all bog standard features of any modern email system.
You typically won't get it all in one box with OSS (but could assemble your own) but Microsoft (exchange), IBM (Notes) and a host of others have prepackaged groupware systems based round a core of email. 99% of users never use the encryption, key management, signing, tracking features, but there you go.
The primary benefit is the network effect. Email works everywhere.
These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use. Not because they're particularly dangerous themselves, but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.
A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this.
You sneak into a store and steal it.
Small, headless, set top size, external usb storage
Running:
tinc
web proxy
samba/gnutella
Myth
some other stuff maybe.
Course. I can build my own easily & as you say, I doubt anyone else needs anything similar.
Hell, they even published a book about it 2 thousand years ago with all the instructions.
Reduce costs of toady s operations by enabling e.g. mobile prepaid top up transactions
lol. I did however like this statement. If it goes through a spell and grammar checker it must be right.
No? Really. Taking a photo of a cheque?
Writing out a cheque, then taking a photo of it? No. You're pulling my leg. And this is an advance?
Why not just transfer the money using the phone?
We can do it here in Europe. They can do it in India and Africa for goodness sake;
http://europe.nokia.com/ovi-services-and-apps/nokia-money
People who deal with raw physical measurements (radar engineers, astronomers, the guy who makes airspeed sensor of the B2--er,um...) have had this problem figured out for a while.
It sounds easy to you cos you have an easy job. You only have a single, easy to measure parameter.
In other fields there can be dozens, hundreds or thousands of parameters, each with it's own signal. Determining which of the signals (if any) are meaningful is a lot harder than what you're doing. What I'm saying is, you're an engineer, not a scientist.
HTH.
Total genius! Where'd you get this gem from? LOL!
Isn't it obvious? Take a look at digital media. The supply can be (basically) infinite, so how much do people value songs at? Nothing. They download them for free.
The value of something is zero if nobody wants to buy it.
Too many houses?
http://blogs.wsj.com/developments/2009/05/05/in-bank-demolition-echoes-of-the-great-depression/tab/article/
http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/fresh-greens/2009/05/05/what-a-waste-new-homes-demolished-by-bank
Knock em down.
When has capitalism worked so efficiently that it produced so much that what it produced cost nothing? Prices don't fall to zero in any system because doing anything requires energy, which necessitates some positive cost.
The value falls to zero. The cost doesn't. i.e. You built it but can't sell it because nobody wants it.
In fact because most money is based on debt. The loan required to make the product which could satisfy the demand is (usually) never made in the first place. The loan requires a profit. If demand has been satisfied, the value is zero and there can't be any profit.
e.g. everlasting light bulbs. Once they've all been made, demand has been satisfied. The value of one too many lightbulbs is zero. Nobody would give the loan which allows you to make that lightbulb because they'll never see a return on their loan.
It is the perception of relative worth that gives money its intrinsic value.
There's no such thing as intrinsic value, only relative value. But you're on the right track. Money itself has some desirable qualities; You can spend it anywhere you want, it doesn't degrade or rot so you can choose when to spend it, or not. Opportunity is a key quality. The desire to have money or the desire to have the goods depends whether you spend the money and buy the goods. If you make money less desirable, it'll be spent faster (Which is why most economists recommend mild inflation). Gesell described a more explicit system of demurrage. A monthly 1% penalty for holding money. Penalising the holding of money separates it's store of value quality from it's medium of exchange quality. It becomes purely a medium of exchange, people pass it on and use other things to store value.
How long does it take to get to the station?
How long does it take waiting for your train?
How long does it take waiting for connections?
How long does it take to get from the station to your destination?
How often does the train stop? How long does it spend at 0mph? What does that do to the average speed?
In France and Germany, as well as the UK, rail travel represents a tiny proportion of passenger miles travelled every year. The reality is that in well over 90% of journeys, the train performs very poorly indeed. Which explains the usage statistics with respect to cars.
In Canada, if that person gets into an accident, my taxes are going to pay for his hospital bill. I'm all for saving lives, but I would rather prevent injury before it happens. In this case I worked goddamn hard for my money
The idea that you think this gives you the right to tell me how I should live my life is THE single primary reason that a nationalised health system is a bad idea.
It's USB.
capitalism requires that there be supply and demand. The value of sometthing is related to both. If the supply exceeds the demand, the price falls to zero. This means that for capitalism to function, the demand *must* exceed the supply.
This means you must never build enough houses. You must never grow enough food. You must never make enough clothes, cars, whatever(wealth). This also means there *must* always be poor there *must* always be starving *must* always be unemployment to ensure demand.
We have just seen an example of the supply exceeding demand. It is called a crash. The supply of houses exceeded the demand for them and now, they're literally knocking them down in order to reduce the supply and increase the value of the ones remaining. It's an insane situation.
This is something Silvio Gesell pointed out around 100 years ago. In order to change this, the nature of money itself must be changed.
But Nokia wanted more from Apple for these patents than they did from anyone else.
Really? So, exactly how much did Nokia want from Apple?
And exactly how much did the other licensees pay?
Nokia has a huge R&D organisation. Everything from software down to silicon.
Don't bother with IRC. Insist on email instead.
Then train a bayesian classifier (bogofilter) to answer the questions for you.
You just have to remember Bayesian classifiers are good at yes/no classifications (e.g. spam/notspam), so I have several corpuses and test incoming emails serially against them, tagging with the ones which match. Then process the email according to the tag. FAQ should be fairly easy. Use a procmail rule to answer, "thanks for your question, please have a look here".
Large oil reserves. There is a correlation between oil and domestic political problems. You might even think there are groups trying to sabotage each other.
It's easy to get away with stealing 4-5 dollars, and if you do it often enough you make a tidy profit...
This is the basis of banking. The loans which banks make are essentially, value removed from the existing pot of money. Each loan represents a few fractions of a cent removed from everyone's paycheck &/or bank account.
There is a hypothetical moral question which is commonly asked in psychological personality tests. "If you found a way of stealing a tiny amount of money from everyone, knowing you could never be caught. Would you do it?". Superman III was even about this particular moral question. It's not actually hypothetical, it's how our monetary system works.
The irony of course is that naive parents educate their children that taking something without consent is bad, when actually it's the very core of our society.