I posted a story which did not get accepted about John Filippidis. A guy who had a concealed carry permit in Florida. He did own a gun, and left it at home when on a trip. Maryland police stopped him and detained him for a couple of hours for no reason.
This was made possible be datamining efforts and automatic license scanneres.
Who stands to profit more? Professors on a fixed salary or corporations selling the stuff that is blamed for climate change?
You mean: Professors on a fixed salary who rely on grants to keep that salary or corporations who make one-fifth what the government makes on the sale of their stuff.
Are the companies that sell oil really "Big Oil" or is "Big Oil" really the government?
Let us imagine for example web servers. Any http daemon should be easy for a single C/C++ programmer to implement.Yes the more all the bells and whistles will take a lot more work, but something functional. --no problem. These things run massively parallel yet have no problems? Why. There is no need for the threads to communicate.
Where do web servers have conncurency problems? Answer, when the execute processes that access shared data For example order processing programs that access the same database. Then all the concurrency problems come back.
Generally shared data causes enough problems that a fairly intelligent programmer avoids sharing data unless absolutely necessary, like the order processing system. So that any shared data in a concurrent system written by intelligent people is necessary. What's more the machinery required by functional programming requires that the programmer be of average intelligence. So functional programming most likely solves a problem that isn't there.
To top it off, the part of coding where functional programming is best used, is precisely the easier part of any programming problem. So all the extra effort in functional programming is spent solving the easiest part of the problem which is the part that doesn't need it.
I mean come on! This is reported on by Reuters, and they do not supply a link to the ruling itself. Which means they probably state the ruling all wrong and also leave out important details. In fact one detail I see at once is missing. Whose emails are these?
They could be Boris Putins,.or Kim Dotcoms, in which case I would have severe problems with the judges orders. Or they could be Dread Pirate Roberts, or even Microsofts operating emails stored in Dublin just to avoid having to turn them over in which case I would have no problems with the judges orders.
In any case please get us all the facts before putting up such a story. Is that really too much to ask?
I think it is important to note that in the 80's, Steven Weinberg wrote something to the effect of "It is shame that the Big Bang Theory is the most likely form of cosmology, since that theory most resembles the description in Genesis."
The ultra conservative Christian people people do not scare me much. I get where they are coming from ( mostly, of course there is the occasional Westborro church ) and most just want to believe what they believe and teach their kids so.
The scary people are the people who make science their religion usually without knowing what the science says and also criticising religion without knowing what the religion says. Or knowing who the scientist they make their new high priests are. They might as well be following Immanuel Velikovsky.
This is a big con by the Obama administration. They create a rule to ban a hundred year old practice, because it might be unsafe. You would think that after 100 years there would be clear evidence that it is unsafe.
In the meantime it also means beef prices will rise. Which is the real plan, spearheaded by thunder-thighs Michelle. This along with the attack on the Bundy ranch, destroying 100 cows--and denying their meat to the market, a quick BotE calculation shows one cow produces enough meat for a family of four for a couple of years--is a plan not only to deny school kids decent lunches but to prevent their buying burgers after school.
In the meantime, we had a system for recycling waste that was ideal. No machine, no artificial process-- just totally natural, and we tear that up to waste good animal feed.
As I've said before many environmentalists are green only when it's convenient.
Great so they make a rule to ban a 100 year old practice, based on no evidence that it is unsafe--gee after 100 years. Then take comments to adjust the rule great.
I think a major point is wasted. Certain researchers fund their research by teaching. Recently I read some blog, ( I'll try to find it ), where a mathematician asked that if Calculus is replaced by video lectures, how will mathematicians find the money to continue doing their research?
I'm not saying that we should continue to force students to listen to crappy lectures by teachers that only give lectures cause it funds their research. What I am saying is that research is often times important and we need an alternate way of funding it.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe hackers can program it so that any coordinates given to it, cause it to fly to Seatle.
When the kernel panics, it's time for everyone to panic.
I hear the Chicken Littles squacking again.
And all the people really suck at XML.
She still your wife?
I posted a story which did not get accepted about John Filippidis. A guy who had a concealed carry permit in Florida. He did own a gun, and left it at home when on a trip. Maryland police stopped him and detained him for a couple of hours for no reason.
This was made possible be datamining efforts and automatic license scanneres.
Very chilling.
how much do the students retain when taking notes on a galaxy note tablet?
Who stands to profit more?
Professors on a fixed salary or corporations selling the stuff that is blamed for climate change?
You mean: Professors on a fixed salary who rely on grants to keep that salary or corporations who make one-fifth what the government makes on the sale of their stuff.
Are the companies that sell oil really "Big Oil" or is "Big Oil" really the government?
If you are worried about security don't use software written by people who can't be bothered to check parameters.
Larry Ellison makes great products?
Guess those Russian trampolines aren't so good after all.
Hey. My suggestion to the Ars guy who tried it out. Add sugar free coffee syrup.Then tasteless gruel becomes tasty gruel.
Or you could simply add some fruit/fruit juice to it.
The hydrogen is still there, it's just coupled to oxygen. You can use electrolysis to extract the hydrogen.
for programming, is that it solves nothing.
Let us imagine for example web servers. Any http daemon should be easy for a single C/C++ programmer to implement.Yes the more all the bells and whistles will take a lot more work, but something functional. --no problem. These things run massively parallel yet have no problems? Why. There is no need for the threads to communicate.
Where do web servers have conncurency problems?
Answer, when the execute processes that access shared data For example order processing programs that access the same database. Then all the concurrency problems come back.
Generally shared data causes enough problems that a fairly intelligent programmer avoids sharing data unless absolutely necessary, like the order processing system. So that any shared data in a concurrent system written by intelligent people is necessary. What's more the machinery required by functional programming requires that the programmer be of average intelligence. So functional programming most likely solves a problem that isn't there.
To top it off, the part of coding where functional programming is best used, is precisely the easier part of any programming problem. So all the extra effort in functional programming is spent solving the easiest part of the problem which is the part that doesn't need it.
I mean come on!
This is reported on by Reuters, and they do not supply a link to the ruling itself. Which means they probably state the ruling all wrong and also leave out important details. In fact one detail I see at once is missing. Whose emails are these?
They could be Boris Putins,.or Kim Dotcoms, in which case I would have severe problems with the judges orders.
Or they could be Dread Pirate Roberts, or even Microsofts operating emails stored in Dublin just to avoid having to turn them over in which case I would have no problems with the judges orders.
In any case please get us all the facts before putting up such a story.
Is that really too much to ask?
I think it was a joke.
They tried that once. It almost got them broken up.
None of the physics is new. Just good old newtonian pohysics. So why not write out the equations of motion and see exactly what is happening?
would ask that ISPs be classified as common carriers. Then there could be nothing they can do.
I think it is important to note that in the 80's, Steven Weinberg wrote something to the effect of "It is shame that the Big Bang Theory is the most likely form of cosmology, since that theory most resembles the description in Genesis."
The ultra conservative Christian people people do not scare me much. I get where they are coming from ( mostly, of course there is the occasional Westborro church ) and most just want to believe what they believe and teach their kids so.
The scary people are the people who make science their religion usually without knowing what the science says and also criticising religion without knowing what the religion says. Or knowing who the scientist they make their new high priests are. They might as well be following Immanuel Velikovsky.
This is a big con by the Obama administration. They create a rule to ban a hundred year old practice, because it might be unsafe. You would think that after 100 years there would be clear evidence that it is unsafe.
In the meantime it also means beef prices will rise. Which is the real plan, spearheaded by thunder-thighs Michelle. This along with the attack on the Bundy ranch, destroying 100 cows--and denying their meat to the market, a quick BotE calculation shows one cow produces enough meat for a family of four for a couple of years--is a plan not only to deny school kids decent lunches but to prevent their buying burgers after school.
In the meantime, we had a system for recycling waste that was ideal. No machine, no artificial process-- just totally natural, and we tear that up to waste good animal feed.
As I've said before many environmentalists are green only when it's convenient.
I don't see Democrats rushing out to stop H1B's. In fact Obam and Clonton have both pushed for more Visas.
Great so they make a rule to ban a 100 year old practice, based on no evidence that it is unsafe--gee after 100 years. Then take comments to adjust the rule great.
Uhm. According to the article brewers and farmers have been doing this for a 100 years. If this was inherently unsafe, we would know by now.
I think a major point is wasted. Certain researchers fund their research by teaching. Recently I read some blog, ( I'll try to find it ), where a mathematician asked that if Calculus is replaced by video lectures, how will mathematicians find the money to continue doing their research?
I'm not saying that we should continue to force students to listen to crappy lectures by teachers that only give lectures cause it funds their research. What I am saying is that research is often times important and we need an alternate way of funding it.