Any time you need interface contributions from Lotus Freaking Notes, something is badly wrong.
I'm curious about the accessibility support for that helpful feature it has, where entering the password characters puts up random numbers of bullets while hieroglyphics blink randomly around the input box, apparently to distract and confuse shoulder surfers. Do they have a similar function for blind users? And how about sighted users and blind shoulder surfers? Shouldn't it make random annoying noises as well, to confuse them?
It's not quite an "application" but: WindowMaker. Unbloated in every sense.
Also, as the rest of modern desktop Linux has bloated to the point where Konsole and Gnome Terminal aren't bottlenecks any more I've moved away from it in favor of tabs, but I used to only use rxvt instead of heavier alternatives. Gnome Terminal in particular used to have visible lag, and I'm a lot more tolerant of that stuff in a multimedia app than in a freaking shell.
It seems ISO is not prepared for a politicized process where a big and influential commercial enterprise will use any means possible to push its own standard through to certification.
Whatever the merit of his suggestions, the idea that ISO is new to high-pressure corporate gamesmanship and requires a condescending lecture from a titan of industry like "the CEO of Freecode" has to qualify as the laugh of the day.
If you give $100 Apple Store credit to the sort of people who bought an iPhone on iPhone Day, that's all the excuse they need to buy a new iPod, or a MacBook or another iPhone.
What would you have bought with a credit for your SE, a IIe?
Looking at the paper (linked in the article), they're doing that and then using differential heating of the tanks to shift the fuel to rebalance them.
Sure, it seemed likely that an idea that's obvious to the morons here has been nonetheless overlooked by decades of aerospace engineers, but this time that doesn't appear to be the case.
...duping himself and thus Slashdot is duping the stories by extension.
I read the blurb and thought "Haven't we had the same 'debate' over the same guy a bunch of times before?" The name stuck in my head as I always envision the former Notre Dame linebacker and his famously low GPA turning to a career in database architecture.
Wouldn't a scalpel and some scissors resolve any lingering questions?
The paper, for those with access to Nature, has extensive dissections. It's not just based on the film of feeding, although I think that's what started them looking.
There aren't that many starving people in a position to do so. Starving rurals are in that position because of drought, pests or rampaging armies; knocking down their shack to get a little more dirt won't help them. Starving urbanites don't own buildings.
No, it replaces farmland because cities grow out into previously rural places, and smaller farms sell out because they can make more money by selling the land than farming it.
I think you're confusing cause and effect, though. Farming becomes less profitable so the farmers have to sell to developers. If there were really danger of impending famine because of the loss of farmland, turning farms into townhouses wouldn't be profitable. (And in the doomsday scenarios people are invoking, knocking down McMansions to plant potatoes certainly would be.)
That may be true, but newer crop variants are much more productive per area than traditional ones are. Overall, I'm sure the GP is correct. And even more so for raising animals.
I really doubt you need anything that complicated. People will knock down some building and plant crops long before they'll starve. I'm not sure why the OP thinks it's impossible.
Developed land is replacing farmland because agriculture gets more and more efficient, not because of some law of thermodynamics.
I think the post was really complaining about the inappropriate use of a 2x2 contingency table.
Exactly, for the reasons you mentioned and also because he had seen the data before deciding on the cut point.
I agree with you about the one-tailed test though.
Someone else addressed that point pretty well already. The one thing I'd add is that using a one-tailed test gives your alternative hypothesis a huge boost in power and even where it's technically defensible, it's still best to reserve it for cases where statistical significance would be contrary to what you're hoping to find.
Given the inappropriate use of the Fisher's test, questionable use of a one-tailed model and p > 0.05, I'd start with worrying about having proven correlation.
...forging data to and from customers is a big no-no...
I realize that to the nerdish mind falsifying the sender of an IP packet is equivalent to "impersonating another", but no sane prosecutor would ever make such a case.
And given the apparent obviousness of this invention (unlike most of the nonsensical "Microsoft Patents [some ancient computing feature]!!!" stories here), it's odd that this silly aside about religion is what was chosen to complain about.
As silly as it sounds...new Linux users...Whilst to the average Slashdotter this may sound silly...your average Joe...
I've been using Linux since MkLinux zero-point-something, and when I had to update a Gentoo box from XFree to X.org, my old conf file didn't work and xconfigurator (or whichever one the command-line tool is called) didn't generate a working file. Eventually it turned out that a serial mouse isn't supported, and switching to a USB mouse allowed a working conf file to be generated that I could then tweak. I never did get the beloved old mouse working.
So anything that improves the X configuration process is a very welcome improvement over calling users names when the crappy old tools don't work.
However, you have to patent it before publicly disclosing it anywhere: publications, talks, abstracts, posters. You can't become famous for something and not patent it while still "leaving options open".
The whole question seems a little misplaced. If you create something really important, receiving credit will take care of itself. If you create something unimportant, no one will be trying to take the credit away from you. If being famous is an end in itself, go on a reality show.
No one is saying that that's legal. The question is whether the MPAA should have known they were obtained illegally when Anderson sold the emails to them, claiming they had been obtained legally.
Anyway, I'm sure some combination of "they weren't stolen, they were copied" and ""let's say you leave your back door unlocked and I..." is sufficient to make all of this OK.
Sure, calling 100 different embassies can be kind of a hassle, but he could just send out an email with a bunch of BCCs.
Yeah, you'd think that a guy who is so 1337 that he "accidentally" ran a cracker against 6 different embassies (it's 100 people, not embassies, despite what the submitter and Zonk wrote) wouldn't have trouble cc'ing them. My coworkers don't seem to have any trouble cc'ing a lot more people than that.
My understanding of Windows is extremely skimpy so I could easily have misunderstood, but that doesn't make any sense to me. What are the manufacturers sending you if the disk needs to be specific to your data?
Oh, absolutely, what the salesmen were doing there is disgusting and probably illegal. I was talking about the practice of selling them at all, not about lying about it. And the stores would probably be wiser in the long run to throw the disks in for free instead of making the customers feel gouged at every turn.
Given that the people who will buy these disks would almost certainly not make their own, let alone request one from the maker, the question is whether the store price is worth the difference between having and not having one. I'd say it is.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm curious about the accessibility support for that helpful feature it has, where entering the password characters puts up random numbers of bullets while hieroglyphics blink randomly around the input box, apparently to distract and confuse shoulder surfers. Do they have a similar function for blind users? And how about sighted users and blind shoulder surfers? Shouldn't it make random annoying noises as well, to confuse them?
Also, as the rest of modern desktop Linux has bloated to the point where Konsole and Gnome Terminal aren't bottlenecks any more I've moved away from it in favor of tabs, but I used to only use rxvt instead of heavier alternatives. Gnome Terminal in particular used to have visible lag, and I'm a lot more tolerant of that stuff in a multimedia app than in a freaking shell.
Whatever the merit of his suggestions, the idea that ISO is new to high-pressure corporate gamesmanship and requires a condescending lecture from a titan of industry like "the CEO of Freecode" has to qualify as the laugh of the day.
If you give $100 Apple Store credit to the sort of people who bought an iPhone on iPhone Day, that's all the excuse they need to buy a new iPod, or a MacBook or another iPhone.
What would you have bought with a credit for your SE, a IIe?
Sure, it seemed likely that an idea that's obvious to the morons here has been nonetheless overlooked by decades of aerospace engineers, but this time that doesn't appear to be the case.
I read the blurb and thought "Haven't we had the same 'debate' over the same guy a bunch of times before?" The name stuck in my head as I always envision the former Notre Dame linebacker and his famously low GPA turning to a career in database architecture.
The paper, for those with access to Nature, has extensive dissections. It's not just based on the film of feeding, although I think that's what started them looking.
If you have a counterexample, I'd welcome it.
I think you're confusing cause and effect, though. Farming becomes less profitable so the farmers have to sell to developers. If there were really danger of impending famine because of the loss of farmland, turning farms into townhouses wouldn't be profitable. (And in the doomsday scenarios people are invoking, knocking down McMansions to plant potatoes certainly would be.)
I agree, but a collapse of civilization is precisely what was being discussed.
In Zimbabwe, where agriculture has collapsed, shanties are torn down to grow gardens in urban areas.
That may be true, but newer crop variants are much more productive per area than traditional ones are. Overall, I'm sure the GP is correct. And even more so for raising animals.
Developed land is replacing farmland because agriculture gets more and more efficient, not because of some law of thermodynamics.
Exactly, for the reasons you mentioned and also because he had seen the data before deciding on the cut point.
I agree with you about the one-tailed test though.
Someone else addressed that point pretty well already. The one thing I'd add is that using a one-tailed test gives your alternative hypothesis a huge boost in power and even where it's technically defensible, it's still best to reserve it for cases where statistical significance would be contrary to what you're hoping to find.
Given the inappropriate use of the Fisher's test, questionable use of a one-tailed model and p > 0.05, I'd start with worrying about having proven correlation.
I realize that to the nerdish mind falsifying the sender of an IP packet is equivalent to "impersonating another", but no sane prosecutor would ever make such a case.
And given the apparent obviousness of this invention (unlike most of the nonsensical "Microsoft Patents [some ancient computing feature]!!!" stories here), it's odd that this silly aside about religion is what was chosen to complain about.
I've been using Linux since MkLinux zero-point-something, and when I had to update a Gentoo box from XFree to X.org, my old conf file didn't work and xconfigurator (or whichever one the command-line tool is called) didn't generate a working file. Eventually it turned out that a serial mouse isn't supported, and switching to a USB mouse allowed a working conf file to be generated that I could then tweak. I never did get the beloved old mouse working.
So anything that improves the X configuration process is a very welcome improvement over calling users names when the crappy old tools don't work.
The whole question seems a little misplaced. If you create something really important, receiving credit will take care of itself. If you create something unimportant, no one will be trying to take the credit away from you. If being famous is an end in itself, go on a reality show.
Anyway, I'm sure some combination of "they weren't stolen, they were copied" and ""let's say you leave your back door unlocked and I..." is sufficient to make all of this OK.
At any rate, I'd be curious what this guy did that caused these passwords to "accidentally" fall out.
Yeah, you'd think that a guy who is so 1337 that he "accidentally" ran a cracker against 6 different embassies (it's 100 people, not embassies, despite what the submitter and Zonk wrote) wouldn't have trouble cc'ing them. My coworkers don't seem to have any trouble cc'ing a lot more people than that.
Or reverse your "choice" and get cable? We're not talking about a vasectomy here, and even those are usually reversible.
My understanding of Windows is extremely skimpy so I could easily have misunderstood, but that doesn't make any sense to me. What are the manufacturers sending you if the disk needs to be specific to your data?
Oh, absolutely, what the salesmen were doing there is disgusting and probably illegal. I was talking about the practice of selling them at all, not about lying about it. And the stores would probably be wiser in the long run to throw the disks in for free instead of making the customers feel gouged at every turn.
Given that the people who will buy these disks would almost certainly not make their own, let alone request one from the maker, the question is whether the store price is worth the difference between having and not having one. I'd say it is.