If the goal is getting people interested, implying a lack of interest, you can't measure it yet.
Going from not interested to being in an AP class is not a reasonable expectation in a school year. Being in the class does not imply being remotely capable of passing. And the tests cost money. Some states have conditional reimbursement, but I don't see it working out well for people otherwise disinterested a year prior.
People have some idea of the classes they will take entering high school. While that may change, it won't change much due to outside influence like this.
I would not expect numbers to change much for another two years. I planned my AP tests for maximum benefit, and even with 6 years experience under my belt, I would not have signed up for the class, and had I gone that far the test would have given me no real advantage. I made sure I got AP math, English, and foreign language, for college credit. I took AP physics but skipped the test because it didn't fit the plan.
All of this was a pre ordained outcome based on the classes I took freshman year. You have to consider the first four years building years, as each year has a less specific plan in place that this effort has to fight against.
The console has the DRM, and there's not much that a publisher has to add. If this were about PC games, maybe you might have a point. But it's not. Everything in the summary is about consoles.
This is a really interesting topic, or at least it could be if some nimrod didn't just dismiss all of the interesting bits with "must be DRM because that's the only topic I'm concerned about".
And then instead of learning when your thread went down in flames, and I quote you here, "it makes me wonder if their aren't some astroturfing accounts at work."
Astoturfing is the answer, obviously, not that you are completely off topic?
You need a third party framework to make better tables than tables?
When layout matters, and things need to be where I put them, tables are predictable. Absolute positioning works well if you want to support a single resolution.
The number of times we have had a blog post with the "holy grail" of any arbitrary layout is ridiculous. A fluid center column with a left and right column sized to content, is as common as it is frustrating. I'm sure you can wave your hand and pull the best off the top of the pile. But it's been a long hard road to get this far.
I've spent far too much time chasing down a CSS oddity to give a shit at this point. I don't get paid for clean. Maybe it's better now, but I'm not wasting any more time learning another framework just to do what tables already do.
The relevant facts in this case are not in dispute. Gonzalez admits that she infringed upon the Recording Companies' copyrights by downloading 30 songs from the internet which she did not own. Numerous courts have held that downloading music from the internet, which the user does not own, constitutes "direct infringement." In re Aimster Copyright Litig., 334 F.3d 643, 645 (7th Cir. 2003); A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, 239 F.3d 1004, 1014 (9th Cir. 2001); Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc. v. Bryant, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26700, 2004 WL 78123, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2004).
Ask a lawyer if they would defend you given this decision in Gonzalez. Ask a lawyer if it matters that there is no federal law.
The point was diversity welcomes people from all over the world. Are you saying that is wrong? Could an Armenian or Dutch or Indian not find a welcoming community with a little research?
I can understand England and France hating each other as in your example, but that was not the point of the post to which you replied, eh?
My most recent sporting event was filled with people expressing their anger and frustration by asking one team to "crush", "kill", "smash", and other unpleasant things to the other team.
Is one expression metaphorical and the other obviously not? Is it a serious threat just because someone took the time to write it as opposed to shouting it? Is rage forgivable simply because people are in a group setting where it could develop into mob behavior, and not forgivable because an individual is ranting from his mom's basement?
I'm not going to defend raising money for a hit-man, but I'm also not going to assume the person raising money would have been able to 1) raise the money or 2) find a hitman who isn't law enforcement or 3) complete the deal.
Linux advocates are as much about faith and anger as religious nuts calling for God to strike down anyone they disagree with. It is religious level belief, and you can read the same level of fervor in the replies to Lennart, as you can in Christian replies to pro-Islam, or even pro-tolerance. The glee in response to the Left Behind trailers, and Christians celebrate all of the non-believers suffering is exactly the same as the blind rage towards someone replacing core functionality of major linux distributions.
So, considering that most sports fans, many religious people, basically a huge percentage of people have the same defective moral compass, where does that leave us? Anger is anger, and venting is venting, and it will continue because people don't know when to stop talking, or stop typing, and they say things they don't mean.
How would I feel if I were Lennart? Understandably frightened, and I would feel a responsibility at exposing the poor manners of the community. But that's emotion again. As an impassive observer, I have to note that it is statistically very unlikely that anything would come of this, and very confident that all of this is just venting and bluster.
Are open source community members assholes? When you are the object of anger, yes. In other words, the open source community is full of people. Real people, with real emotions, and a real inability to rationally discuss what they are most passionate about.
To be clear, actually raising money for a hit man is not acceptable. Claiming to raise money symbolically is not the same as actually raising money for a hit man, but it can be a very effective way of bluster. As the money piles up and the anger cools, I'd be more likely to believe in a plot I hadn't heard about, than a plot I had heard about.
It would seem a discussion with the distro maintainers over the technical merits/deficiencies of systemd would be more in order. I've found the few open source projects I've followed more closely (NHibernate, automapper, PetaPoco) to be reasonably polite. Is Linux very different? Is it just the size/complexity that makes people jerks?
You are as correct as you are wrong.
People feel betrayed when large changes are made. It is easier to agree with someone who has a terrible argument, but is vocal. So people feel betrayed because other people say they should feel that way.
Windows XP is the Teletubby OS. Fallout 3 is about wandering around collecting bottlecaps. These statements catch on, and people state them religiously to explain what the people can't put into words - which is that they are confused.
When people are confused and can't articulate, they devolve into name calling and posturing, which triggers a primal response in the person they responded to, who feels attacked and responds (in) appropriately.
Now, anyone personally identifiable is a foaming shitsquirt, a cum covered fuckstack, and a ball-gargling one-person anal bat-smuggling operation. Because anger now has a target. A group is hard to blame, easier to dismiss. An identity, specifically a name, is really easy to attack.
People are jerks because they don't realize how emotionally attached to nonsense they are. People don't know how to express confusion, and they feel that they are on the right side of the argument without truly knowing what makes that true. Rarely, they are just not right in the head, like anger issues. But that is the outlier.
That should be "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey", and I looked at it from 1948 to 2014.
The statistics point to a drastic change in the future. But if we look at the statistics right now, there is work to be done, and we have to have people to do it. And just because productivity is high doesn't mean the work goes away. So right now, yes it makes sense to anyone, if you think about it as more than rhetoric. When you put it as you did, no it doesn't make sense.
This is only insightful for a myopic subset of the population being referenced.
Make a list of professions where this is the case, and one where it is not the case. Even removing the ones where your grades are not relevant, parent post applies to a minorit.
And if the result had been the opposite, you would say that it makes sense because we don't imitate people with negative food related outcomes. Like poisoning, or fat, because it is harder to outrun a bear when poisoned or fat.
What really happened was you read thus, decided you had no pre existing beliefs that were threatened, and worked it into your mental framework. Then you pulled it back out, along with all of the information you used when evaluating it initially.
And that's normal. I'm just cautioning you because this looks like a bad study with unsupported conclusions, and you are using it as support for a belief or understanding it is not capable of supporting.
The conclusion section of any study, especially in social sciences, is basically the op-ed page. At some point, the studies pile up and people have to give up their opinions and do science.
But anything sufficiently novel is the author seeing what they expected to see. And it will remain so until another study figures out how to answer questions like you raised.
Now, how do you propose to separate those variables and answer those questions?
If you practice anything wrong, you won't get better. If you spend 10,000 hours just doing something and not getting better, it isn't practice.
That's not a circular argument - it's two different things.
Someone with talent may need to put in less than 10,000 hours. Someone with little talent may need 15,000 hours. There's no magic number unless you distill out a lot of detail.
But, if you have absolutely no sense for what you're doing, you can't practice on your own and get better. Innate talent implies that you can recognize what you are doing wrong, or can figure out ways to get better. Without talent, you need some guidance.
And public school electives are a terrible place for someone to get the kind of guidance needed to turn repetitive motions into the kind of practice that makes you better. "No amount of practice" was probably a simple way of saying "I can't give you enough time so you're on your own, and also I'm stupid."
Also, the singular of anecdote is not a counterargument.
I think we need to build our own government, and outlaw bribery
Without bribery, how do politicians know which constituents to support? The ones who can take off work to travel to DC for a personal meeting? The ones who can afford to donate to a political campaign to support the person they think is most qualified? Or do you get an "I voted for..." placard that gives you the right to a 5-minute audience?
Which bribery are you referring to? And after it is outlawed, how have you prevented anyone from spending money for access, even if it doesn't go to the candidate?
Do we tell the boards of directors of public companies that they can't hire government officials once they leave office? How does that affect private companies? and which public official would guarantee they are jobless once their political career ends?
It's a nice sound bite, in other words, but it's meaningless. Removing all bribery is impossible, and once you achieve that there are too many loopholes and side avenues that no one would consider illegal - just advantageous to the same people who can afford bribery.
So I'm going to need for you to be really specific on what exactly you meant.
Slashdot Mirror
If the goal is getting people interested, implying a lack of interest, you can't measure it yet.
Going from not interested to being in an AP class is not a reasonable expectation in a school year. Being in the class does not imply being remotely capable of passing. And the tests cost money. Some states have conditional reimbursement, but I don't see it working out well for people otherwise disinterested a year prior.
People have some idea of the classes they will take entering high school. While that may change, it won't change much due to outside influence like this.
I would not expect numbers to change much for another two years. I planned my AP tests for maximum benefit, and even with 6 years experience under my belt, I would not have signed up for the class, and had I gone that far the test would have given me no real advantage. I made sure I got AP math, English, and foreign language, for college credit. I took AP physics but skipped the test because it didn't fit the plan.
All of this was a pre ordained outcome based on the classes I took freshman year. You have to consider the first four years building years, as each year has a less specific plan in place that this effort has to fight against.
The console has the DRM, and there's not much that a publisher has to add. If this were about PC games, maybe you might have a point. But it's not. Everything in the summary is about consoles.
This is a really interesting topic, or at least it could be if some nimrod didn't just dismiss all of the interesting bits with "must be DRM because that's the only topic I'm concerned about".
And then instead of learning when your thread went down in flames, and I quote you here, "it makes me wonder if their aren't some astroturfing accounts at work."
Astoturfing is the answer, obviously, not that you are completely off topic?
You need a third party framework to make better tables than tables?
When layout matters, and things need to be where I put them, tables are predictable. Absolute positioning works well if you want to support a single resolution.
The number of times we have had a blog post with the "holy grail" of any arbitrary layout is ridiculous. A fluid center column with a left and right column sized to content, is as common as it is frustrating. I'm sure you can wave your hand and pull the best off the top of the pile. But it's been a long hard road to get this far.
I've spent far too much time chasing down a CSS oddity to give a shit at this point. I don't get paid for clean. Maybe it's better now, but I'm not wasting any more time learning another framework just to do what tables already do.
Of course there is no federal law. However,
Ask a lawyer if they would defend you given this decision in Gonzalez. Ask a lawyer if it matters that there is no federal law.
The point was diversity welcomes people from all over the world. Are you saying that is wrong? Could an Armenian or Dutch or Indian not find a welcoming community with a little research?
I can understand England and France hating each other as in your example, but that was not the point of the post to which you replied, eh?
My most recent sporting event was filled with people expressing their anger and frustration by asking one team to "crush", "kill", "smash", and other unpleasant things to the other team.
Is one expression metaphorical and the other obviously not? Is it a serious threat just because someone took the time to write it as opposed to shouting it? Is rage forgivable simply because people are in a group setting where it could develop into mob behavior, and not forgivable because an individual is ranting from his mom's basement?
I'm not going to defend raising money for a hit-man, but I'm also not going to assume the person raising money would have been able to 1) raise the money or 2) find a hitman who isn't law enforcement or 3) complete the deal.
Linux advocates are as much about faith and anger as religious nuts calling for God to strike down anyone they disagree with. It is religious level belief, and you can read the same level of fervor in the replies to Lennart, as you can in Christian replies to pro-Islam, or even pro-tolerance. The glee in response to the Left Behind trailers, and Christians celebrate all of the non-believers suffering is exactly the same as the blind rage towards someone replacing core functionality of major linux distributions.
So, considering that most sports fans, many religious people, basically a huge percentage of people have the same defective moral compass, where does that leave us? Anger is anger, and venting is venting, and it will continue because people don't know when to stop talking, or stop typing, and they say things they don't mean.
How would I feel if I were Lennart? Understandably frightened, and I would feel a responsibility at exposing the poor manners of the community. But that's emotion again. As an impassive observer, I have to note that it is statistically very unlikely that anything would come of this, and very confident that all of this is just venting and bluster.
Are open source community members assholes? When you are the object of anger, yes. In other words, the open source community is full of people. Real people, with real emotions, and a real inability to rationally discuss what they are most passionate about.
To be clear, actually raising money for a hit man is not acceptable. Claiming to raise money symbolically is not the same as actually raising money for a hit man, but it can be a very effective way of bluster. As the money piles up and the anger cools, I'd be more likely to believe in a plot I hadn't heard about, than a plot I had heard about.
You are as correct as you are wrong.
People feel betrayed when large changes are made. It is easier to agree with someone who has a terrible argument, but is vocal. So people feel betrayed because other people say they should feel that way.
Windows XP is the Teletubby OS. Fallout 3 is about wandering around collecting bottlecaps. These statements catch on, and people state them religiously to explain what the people can't put into words - which is that they are confused.
When people are confused and can't articulate, they devolve into name calling and posturing, which triggers a primal response in the person they responded to, who feels attacked and responds (in) appropriately.
Now, anyone personally identifiable is a foaming shitsquirt, a cum covered fuckstack, and a ball-gargling one-person anal bat-smuggling operation. Because anger now has a target. A group is hard to blame, easier to dismiss. An identity, specifically a name, is really easy to attack.
People are jerks because they don't realize how emotionally attached to nonsense they are. People don't know how to express confusion, and they feel that they are on the right side of the argument without truly knowing what makes that true. Rarely, they are just not right in the head, like anger issues. But that is the outlier.
Sure. Do we still have work to do? Unemployment is lower, and labor participation, while dropping, is still pretty good.
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/Survey...
That should be "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey", and I looked at it from 1948 to 2014.
The statistics point to a drastic change in the future. But if we look at the statistics right now, there is work to be done, and we have to have people to do it. And just because productivity is high doesn't mean the work goes away. So right now, yes it makes sense to anyone, if you think about it as more than rhetoric. When you put it as you did, no it doesn't make sense.
This is only insightful for a myopic subset of the population being referenced.
Make a list of professions where this is the case, and one where it is not the case. Even removing the ones where your grades are not relevant, parent post applies to a minorit.
And if the result had been the opposite, you would say that it makes sense because we don't imitate people with negative food related outcomes. Like poisoning, or fat, because it is harder to outrun a bear when poisoned or fat.
What really happened was you read thus, decided you had no pre existing beliefs that were threatened, and worked it into your mental framework. Then you pulled it back out, along with all of the information you used when evaluating it initially.
And that's normal. I'm just cautioning you because this looks like a bad study with unsupported conclusions, and you are using it as support for a belief or understanding it is not capable of supporting.
Do remember those articles about how a person who reads facts that disagree with their beliefs actually digs in and is more convinced they are right?
Kinda wondering how it feels to be that guy.
It's called the backfire effect, popularly, if you get curious.
Good, now go get some grant money and prove it.
The conclusion section of any study, especially in social sciences, is basically the op-ed page. At some point, the studies pile up and people have to give up their opinions and do science.
But anything sufficiently novel is the author seeing what they expected to see. And it will remain so until another study figures out how to answer questions like you raised.
Now, how do you propose to separate those variables and answer those questions?
And control for lots of other things like body language.
In fact, I doubt facial attractiveness was on anyone's mind here except yours.
Mordin? Is that you?
Cannot may not be the right word, but your article supports the idea that they do not make a habit of swimming, which was the fundamental point.
Great apes are not known for their swimming ability, and there have been cases of them drowning in zoos that use water moats to confine them.
Both the apes studied had been raised and cared for by humans in the U.S.
I got it for free.
From your mom.
It's true because I'm ignorant.
I didn't read all of the documents. But where was the under oath part?
Telling the court how you uncovered the evidence is part of discovery, not the "under oath" swearing of individual witnesses. Or am I wrong here?
"while under oath in court" does not relate to discovery. You might be informative, but you are misleading everyone with your information.
You have some idea of the topic, and your limited experience led you down the wrong path.
Copying a large file results in zero free bytes and more swapping than otherwise. Because of the caching you mention.
Tell me that's efficient?
Other related symptoms suggest it is not so irrelevant. Spend time with resource monitor open and be amazed.
I know it is a database, and slightly optimized. "A few records" would not affect query time, especially if they were not in the query path.
What about a lot of records? And how about a lot of records that are in the query path?
You just killed 10 years of trial software, which will expire if not bought but can be activated by copying a string of text from an email.
I'm not going to argue the merits of trial software now, but being able to reinstall trial software would put a crimp in this business model.
Legit software should remove all traces of itself when uninstalled, I'm not arguing that. Freeware is included, paid software, all of that.
"Anything else is a failure", however, is pure ignorance.
If you practice anything wrong, you won't get better. If you spend 10,000 hours just doing something and not getting better, it isn't practice.
That's not a circular argument - it's two different things.
Someone with talent may need to put in less than 10,000 hours. Someone with little talent may need 15,000 hours. There's no magic number unless you distill out a lot of detail.
But, if you have absolutely no sense for what you're doing, you can't practice on your own and get better. Innate talent implies that you can recognize what you are doing wrong, or can figure out ways to get better. Without talent, you need some guidance.
And public school electives are a terrible place for someone to get the kind of guidance needed to turn repetitive motions into the kind of practice that makes you better. "No amount of practice" was probably a simple way of saying "I can't give you enough time so you're on your own, and also I'm stupid."
Also, the singular of anecdote is not a counterargument.
Last thing I read was a fairly even age distribution, including both young genius and a gradual peak into old age.
I'm not going to bother finding a citation. You go first.
Without bribery, how do politicians know which constituents to support? The ones who can take off work to travel to DC for a personal meeting? The ones who can afford to donate to a political campaign to support the person they think is most qualified? Or do you get an "I voted for..." placard that gives you the right to a 5-minute audience?
Which bribery are you referring to? And after it is outlawed, how have you prevented anyone from spending money for access, even if it doesn't go to the candidate?
Do we tell the boards of directors of public companies that they can't hire government officials once they leave office? How does that affect private companies? and which public official would guarantee they are jobless once their political career ends?
It's a nice sound bite, in other words, but it's meaningless. Removing all bribery is impossible, and once you achieve that there are too many loopholes and side avenues that no one would consider illegal - just advantageous to the same people who can afford bribery.
So I'm going to need for you to be really specific on what exactly you meant.