'But how to know for sure if a channel is digital or analog as received?'
Look at the noise characteristics. Analog and digital respond to noise differently. Digital pixilates and stutters but otherwise displays a perfect picture. Analog ghosts and snows.
All that tells you is whether the signal was digital or analog at the point in the transmission chain where the interference occurs. I have an analog TV and analog cable - but I see both digital interference artifacts and analog interference artifacts.
"... will have applications in any industry that requires spotting and reacting to trends", or "anything where behavior is dynamic and you need to move resources around rapidly."
Like, say... a battlefield or even a major military campaign. Eventually war is going to be a matter of software "generals" maneuvering resources and personnel around in order to achieve maximum effect.
You mean like they have since... well, time immemorial? Seriously, that's the definition of generalship in a nutshell - and they've been doing it for millenia. (Though logistics and operations research didn't become formalized until WWII.)
We don't really support the five month or the five year queries, the project or life-long goal.
This quote explains much about Google's consistently unfocused progress with many applications remaining incompletely integrated with the others and often incomplete or in endless 'beta'. If I were an investor in GOOG, I'd be even more nervous now than before.
Legally his counter notice was nothing more than holding his finger against the inside of a coat pocket and claiming he had a gun. Knight got lucky that Viacom didn't call his bluff.
Ugh. You do know that "dissolving the government" is absolutely standard procedure in every parliamentary democracy (ie -- most of the democratic world outside of the the USA)?
Sure it's a standard procedure - whenever who is doing the dissolving believes either a) by doing so he can remove their opposition to him or b) by doing he can replace them with one that more reflects the 'will of the people' (generally read as 'supports the dissolver). It's also a fairly unusual step in a stable parliamentary democracy.
Overreacting to it just demonstrates the provincialism of the American news system.
Try to minimize the importance just demonstrates someone who want to take a slam at the Americans - rather than one who is interested in the truth. Dissolving the goverment is a major step in a parliamentary democracy, and when it happens it's time to pay real close attention to what is going in the country.
"Oh noes! The Governor-General dissolved the Canadian parliament!!! EVILLL!!!1111eleventy"
That would be a very worrisome development indeed - as the Governor-General of Canada would only take that step in a very extraordinary circumstances given Canada's currently stable situation. This is very different from the unstable situation in Russia.
The "American Dream" is, and always has been, a scam. The actual number of people who really worked their way up from dishwasher to millionaire are smaller than the number of people who became millionaires through the lottery, and we all learned the chances of that in highschool.
Purely anecdotal evidence but... I know _three_ millionaires who did the equivalent of working up from being a dishwasher - and no lottery winners. My best friend from high school run an advertising/media company he built from scratch over the last five years and after five years is now pssing into the low six figures in revenue. (With no college education and no starting capital beyond his final unemployment check.)
The American Dream is alive and well. But the trick, as always, is to work like hell. Sitting and whining on Slashdot doesn't cut it. (The high school friend I spoke of? He took his first vacation when I flew across the continent, marched into his office, and physically drug him out of it.)
While being jealous of a wide-body "party airplane" landing right across the street from their office, I think this might be a good thing for NASA and Moffett Field. NASA could certainly use the money.
NASA doesn't get the money - all funds 'earned' by federal agencies, by law, go into a central pool and are disbursed by Congress.
Bombers are not designed to attack navy ships. Battle carrier groups are heavily fortified structures.
Bombers, carrying cruise missiles, do quite well at attacking naval formations. The Russians maintained hundreds of bombers specifically for the purpose. (And the F-14/Phoenix combination was designed expressely to combat them.)
Even back then, they would use small fast aircrafts to hit our ships, not monsters aircrafts that make inviting targets.
Except for one little problem - the Russians didn't have any small fast aircraft that could strike naval battle groups in the GIUK, let alone deep in the North Atlantic. Though normally I am loath to send someone to Tom Clancy for military information - dig up a copy of Red Storm Rising and read his and Larry Bonds' take on what a WWII Battle of the Atlantic might have looked like in the 1980's. He gets it pretty close.
The guarantee is that every 5 years, you need to spend 10 grand on another entertainment setup.
Only if you absolutely insist on having the latest and greatest shiny new toy. OTOH, in the 17 years I've owned a TV - I've spent a grand total of $850. My first TV was a hand-me-down (still in service in one of the kids bedrooms of a former tenant), the second cost $50 used (still in service in the parents bedroom of the same tenants), and the third cost $800 eight years ago - and sits in my living room today.
This comitment to analog technology is just as much a problem for cell phones as for TV. This desire to keep the old stuff going is what keeps USA in the cellphone middle ages.
My cell phone makes and recieves calls, and if I wished to pay to activate the service will send and recieve text messages. How much more do you need? The US stays in the 'dark ages' because the market doesn't demand much more than basic functionality - anything more is mostly sizzle, not steak.
Parenthetically speaking, I find it fascinating how often the Slashdot Hivemind bemoans and curses the US consumer for tossing away perfectly good items and using disposables when reuseables are available - but claims the reverse when it keeps the Hivemind from getting a shiny new toy.
The Phoenix Mars Lander that blasted off last month (this month?) is a static probe. Why couldn't they at least have a smaller version of the rovers that could run out and bring back samples to be worked on by the probe?
Two reasons;
The expected lifetime of the probe is pretty short - even if nuclear powered the odds of it surviving the winter are pretty slim.
Bringing back samples of a useful size means a pretty good sized rover - which leaves no room on the probe for instruments to analyze the samples.
Yes, IT Staff are employees too, but during their course of duties, they may require access to said systems.
Which base, you'll note if you read the entire post, I cover by specifying 'permission and the proper controls".
It's like saying that HR person who files employee information is not allowed to look at the name of the folder without announce it to someone that you "trust".
Violating company policies and snooping is one thing, but employees do not own their computers and staff administering machines do not need permission to access systems.
IT staff are employees too... They don't own the machines either. Not to mention that if you work for a company that handles personal information, you may be breaking the law if you go acessing systems/data without permission and the proper controls.
Your posting is a stark illustration of why the field needs a code of ethics.
Heck, even if it available in a mp3 store... I still prefer a physical CD. I have a perfectly good stereo right by my computer, and thus no need to make my computer into an inferior stereo. (Plus I can cart the CD about the house as needed - something I'd have to pay considerable cash to do so with mp3's.)
Like so many Slashdotters, the grandparent forgets that just because he isn't in the target market - doesn't mean there isn't a market.
Trying to portray this as greens vs. the capitalists is just silly.
Since when are facts silly? Yes, ethanol actually sucks as an alternative fuel. No, the greens didn't discover this until after they got they got their wish and Big Business got involved. Period.
So either the greens are monumentally stupid, monumentally deceitful, or - they have an agenda other than the one they publically promote.
For comparison, corn produces about 0.15 tonnes per hectare, hemp about 0.30 tonnes, and canola (rapeseed) only 1.0 tonnes. So if he's right, it's a very good oil producer, on the order of much harder to grow oil producers like avocado (2.2) or coconut (2.3).
It's not the raw amount of oil per hectare that matters, it's total extractable work (energy recoverable minus energy to produce) that matters.
Should you believe authority without question?
If you are simply going to repeat numbers without attempting to understand them - you might as well.
No, this is what happens when you let big business co-opt a public desire for change and turn it into another money-making scam. People want real alternative fuels, not smoke and mirrors like ethanol.
Which is exactly the grandparents point. Ethanol was touted as 'the' wonder fuel of the future - and many greens spent a lot of time pushing for it to be subsidized and widely adopted. Ethanol was only moved to the 'smoke and mirrors' category when it was discovered (by the greens) that big industry was better a producing it and reaping the benefits that little local farms whom the greens had imagined they were trying to help. Well, duh. If something is demanded in industrial quantities - big industry is always going to win out over the little guy. Simple economics.
I think the point here is not that any one strategy will solve everything- as you note, it won't. That's no reason to shoot down something better than what we've got.
That's the problem - it's not better than what we have. It's a potential enviromental disaster that will take very little encouragement to shift from potential to real. (Or in other words, sometimes doing something just to be doing something is markedly worse than doing nothing.)
On top of which 'what we have' includes corn ethanol, other biodiesels (for example potentially from both corn and soy), etc... etc... and you provide no numbers to show that jatropha is better.
Randomness is measured statistically using multiple tests: see Knuth, Art of Computer Programming Volume 2, Chapter 3 for a thorough discussion of common statistical randomness tests,
Keep in mind that there are several 'grades' of randomness. Something that is good enough for your average Monte Carlo analysis is likely sub par for serious cryptographic purposes.
I mean that puts Australia more towards the Fascist end of the scale than even the US doesn't it? (and that's hard to do)
Actually, it's trivial to be more towards the Facist end of the scale than the US. (Since on that scale the US barely even twitches the meter.)
This isn't a consequence of the current goverment of either state, but a consequence of political innocents repeating the propoganda they've swallowed - even when it contains words they don't know the meaning of. Like for instance, Facist.
Slashdot Mirror
All that tells you is whether the signal was digital or analog at the point in the transmission chain where the interference occurs. I have an analog TV and analog cable - but I see both digital interference artifacts and analog interference artifacts.
Actually, no. Nobody is in a 'race' to send probes to the moon. The 'race' is product of the journalist's imaginings.
You mean like they have since... well, time immemorial? Seriously, that's the definition of generalship in a nutshell - and they've been doing it for millenia. (Though logistics and operations research didn't become formalized until WWII.)
This quote explains much about Google's consistently unfocused progress with many applications remaining incompletely integrated with the others and often incomplete or in endless 'beta'. If I were an investor in GOOG, I'd be even more nervous now than before.
Every time a company gets faced with a potential lawsuit - they weigh the returns vs. the costs to determine whether or not to proceed.
Legally his counter notice was nothing more than holding his finger against the inside of a coat pocket and claiming he had a gun. Knight got lucky that Viacom didn't call his bluff.
Sure it's a standard procedure - whenever who is doing the dissolving believes either a) by doing so he can remove their opposition to him or b) by doing he can replace them with one that more reflects the 'will of the people' (generally read as 'supports the dissolver). It's also a fairly unusual step in a stable parliamentary democracy.
Try to minimize the importance just demonstrates someone who want to take a slam at the Americans - rather than one who is interested in the truth. Dissolving the goverment is a major step in a parliamentary democracy, and when it happens it's time to pay real close attention to what is going in the country.
That would be a very worrisome development indeed - as the Governor-General of Canada would only take that step in a very extraordinary circumstances given Canada's currently stable situation. This is very different from the unstable situation in Russia.
Purely anecdotal evidence but... I know _three_ millionaires who did the equivalent of working up from being a dishwasher - and no lottery winners. My best friend from high school run an advertising/media company he built from scratch over the last five years and after five years is now pssing into the low six figures in revenue. (With no college education and no starting capital beyond his final unemployment check.)
The American Dream is alive and well. But the trick, as always, is to work like hell. Sitting and whining on Slashdot doesn't cut it. (The high school friend I spoke of? He took his first vacation when I flew across the continent, marched into his office, and physically drug him out of it.)
NASA doesn't get the money - all funds 'earned' by federal agencies, by law, go into a central pool and are disbursed by Congress.
Bombers, carrying cruise missiles, do quite well at attacking naval formations. The Russians maintained hundreds of bombers specifically for the purpose. (And the F-14/Phoenix combination was designed expressely to combat them.)
Except for one little problem - the Russians didn't have any small fast aircraft that could strike naval battle groups in the GIUK, let alone deep in the North Atlantic. Though normally I am loath to send someone to Tom Clancy for military information - dig up a copy of Red Storm Rising and read his and Larry Bonds' take on what a WWII Battle of the Atlantic might have looked like in the 1980's. He gets it pretty close.
Only if you absolutely insist on having the latest and greatest shiny new toy. OTOH, in the 17 years I've owned a TV - I've spent a grand total of $850. My first TV was a hand-me-down (still in service in one of the kids bedrooms of a former tenant), the second cost $50 used (still in service in the parents bedroom of the same tenants), and the third cost $800 eight years ago - and sits in my living room today.
My cell phone makes and recieves calls, and if I wished to pay to activate the service will send and recieve text messages. How much more do you need? The US stays in the 'dark ages' because the market doesn't demand much more than basic functionality - anything more is mostly sizzle, not steak.
Parenthetically speaking, I find it fascinating how often the Slashdot Hivemind bemoans and curses the US consumer for tossing away perfectly good items and using disposables when reuseables are available - but claims the reverse when it keeps the Hivemind from getting a shiny new toy.
Two reasons;
What color is the sky on your planet?
Which base, you'll note if you read the entire post, I cover by specifying 'permission and the proper controls".
What color is the sky on your planet?
IT staff are employees too... They don't own the machines either. Not to mention that if you work for a company that handles personal information, you may be breaking the law if you go acessing systems/data without permission and the proper controls.
Your posting is a stark illustration of why the field needs a code of ethics.
Heck, even if it available in a mp3 store... I still prefer a physical CD. I have a perfectly good stereo right by my computer, and thus no need to make my computer into an inferior stereo. (Plus I can cart the CD about the house as needed - something I'd have to pay considerable cash to do so with mp3's.)
Like so many Slashdotters, the grandparent forgets that just because he isn't in the target market - doesn't mean there isn't a market.
Umm... As you point out in your very next paragraph;
It may not be cheap, but it *is* legitimate.
Since when are facts silly? Yes, ethanol actually sucks as an alternative fuel. No, the greens didn't discover this until after they got they got their wish and Big Business got involved. Period.
So either the greens are monumentally stupid, monumentally deceitful, or - they have an agenda other than the one they publically promote.
It's not the raw amount of oil per hectare that matters, it's total extractable work (energy recoverable minus energy to produce) that matters.
If you are simply going to repeat numbers without attempting to understand them - you might as well.
Which is exactly the grandparents point. Ethanol was touted as 'the' wonder fuel of the future - and many greens spent a lot of time pushing for it to be subsidized and widely adopted. Ethanol was only moved to the 'smoke and mirrors' category when it was discovered (by the greens) that big industry was better a producing it and reaping the benefits that little local farms whom the greens had imagined they were trying to help. Well, duh. If something is demanded in industrial quantities - big industry is always going to win out over the little guy. Simple economics.
That's the problem - it's not better than what we have. It's a potential enviromental disaster that will take very little encouragement to shift from potential to real. (Or in other words, sometimes doing something just to be doing something is markedly worse than doing nothing.)
On top of which 'what we have' includes corn ethanol, other biodiesels (for example potentially from both corn and soy), etc... etc... and you provide no numbers to show that jatropha is better.
Keep in mind that there are several 'grades' of randomness. Something that is good enough for your average Monte Carlo analysis is likely sub par for serious cryptographic purposes.
Pagers are recievers, cellular phones (analog or digital) are transmitters. There is a wee, wee bit of difference between them.
Actually, it's trivial to be more towards the Facist end of the scale than the US. (Since on that scale the US barely even twitches the meter.)
This isn't a consequence of the current goverment of either state, but a consequence of political innocents repeating the propoganda they've swallowed - even when it contains words they don't know the meaning of. Like for instance, Facist.