By engine form I meant internal vs external. And of course you could make a highly efficient diesel external combustion engine, you'd just need to pressurise the combustion chamber. Internal vs external refers to in the piston or out of it, not whether the burn takes place in a chamber or not.
And whether or not you void the water is again a design choice. A good engineer weighs up having to take on more water vs having to condense it and chooses. Please don't try to claim that one choise is right in all circumstances. (Have you ever seen a steam locomotive?)
If you read carefully though, Cringely doesn't even state the click rates were even. So there's not even enough data to support his own conclusion.
Incidentally, I would suggest even your test won't prove it, unless the two sites got the same click-throughs at different rates, because we know (well, we think) that google puts well-clicked-on sites higher, and there will be a feedback between high price and high click rate that creates higher apparent relevance. This will then skew the results when the prices are equalised.
I think you are confusing fuel and engine form. Diesel is just a fuel, it doesn't dictate the engine type.
The (only) difference between (1) internal and (2) external combustion is that the fuel energy is used to create an expansion due to (1) a chemical reaction and (2) a state change in some other material. The expansion is then used to drive a piston and after that it's all gears!
The biggest problem with internal combustion is that the heat of the reaction can't be avoided and is absolutely not wanted, so you have to carry around cooling systems. For external combustion the heat is exactly what you want, and it's pretty easy to obtain;-). The downside is you have to carry around some other material (for the state change) which is typically voided rather than cooled and re-used.
So... there's no reason you couldn't make a highly efficient diesel external combustion (probably steam) engine.
In fact this hybrid is arguably pretty clever, as it uses the waste heat in one of the most efficient ways possible, as input to a steam engine! If the water runs out, the car continues on its merry way as a POICE (plain old internal combustion engine) - and a lot of gears!
I think you're right. In fact the grandparent appears to have misread the articles slightly, as Cringely never states that the new site got the same or even similar performance to the old one (although he goes on to describe a drop from 15,000 to 1,200 clicks when the adwords price was dropped).
So it makes perfect sense to suggest that the algorithm is:
Established site @ 10c -> 15,000 clicks
New site @ 1$ -> prolly about 15,000 clicks because the high price counteracts the newness
New site @ 40c -> 1,200 clicks
None of which requires any penalty for change of adword price, only for newness. Unless we know how much 'up' a dollar a word will buy for a brand new site vs an established site, we have no reason to call foul.
In other words: unless he leaves the experiment running (or risks changing his old site), we have insufficient data to conclude that Google is evil.
The only reason anyone in any vessel feels heavy is because the vessel is being accelerated relative to them. In a car, the wheels are in touch with the ground and that is the source of the (acceleration) force.
In a stationary lift, as for the car but with cables providing the force. In a plumetting lift, both are under the same acceleration (zero relative acceleration) and so one feels weightless. In a lift going up, one feels extra heavy.
So it doesn't matter where you are. If you're in a plane just above the ground and the wings fall off, you will feel weightless. If you are skydiving in a bubble you will feel weightless.
In other words... you were right, and both your posts should not be moderated +Anything informative!
Cheers, Justin (Physic, Maths, Oracle and Java bunny).
Riiiight. Obviously I need a better analogy for the hard of thinking.
Suppose it's a ten different people who come round at hourly intervals. And the leaflet guy's also giving out ten different lots of leaflets for different companies, one at a time. And the contract you have with the leaftlet guy doesn't mention only giving leaflets out to each person once. And you didn't tell him in advance not to do it.
Is he still wrong, or are you and the mods who declared you insightful smoking crack?
They can see IP addresses for clicks in their server referrer urls and thus they know that many are frauds (see slashdot et al passim for more info on fraudulent clicks).
Their complaint is effectively that google doesn't provide them with this info and so they have been asked to pay for X clicks when they would like to pay for Y distinct clicks.
They really have no case. Imagine a guy being paid to hand out leaflets in the street... suppose some other guy keeps walking back and forth taking a leaflet - is that the fault of the leaflet guy?
I've heard about these... I totally agree with you. Time for a revolution, I think. What's that quote about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of the people? [I'd put a smiley here to indicate that in fact I do know the quote, but I'm feeling a bit grim for smileys.]
Effectively, as was known from the beginning, it leaves the decision of what is a protest in the hands of the police. Thus anyone doing anything that our lawmakers dislike - such as drawing attention to their misdeeds in any way - can become a crime (within that area).
Thus I conclude that all those who voted for the bill (including my MP Dr Alan Whitehead - Blair lackey, never rebelled or abstained - my letter to him on this is in the post), have their heads firmly inserted up their rectums, right down to the shoulder.
According to the law, there are no innocent protests - within half a mile of parliament. Personally I'm not sure how they decide what a demonstration is...!
To put it another way, if I go and sit in Parliament Square wearing a T-shirt with "Iraq was Wrong" printed on it - or better yet "Bollocks to Blair" then I can be arrested for it. Have I deliberately broken a law and should face consequences? Effectively, it depends on what 'they' think was in my head.
I think that's a police state, myself, and I don't like it.
She did it on October 25th 2005, and was convicted yesterday. The law is the Serious Crime and Police Act 2005, which criminalises 'demonstrating without a licence' within a half mile or so of parliament. Surf google news for the story, it's been well covered.
Currently Thunderbird opens a new window for every email I want open (not previewed, open - I will be working with info in there for the next hour). This change makes a tabbed MDI version so they all share a window. I like this sort of thing. It reduces my screen clutter.
[Why the hell am I reading so many whinges about how this is unnecessary?!]
head in which ever direction you see a hawk flying, and don't stop for anything other than gas for 500 miles.
I like your thinking, but I live in the UK. Here if we head in which ever direction we see a hawk flying, and don't stop for anything other than petrol for 500 miles, we're probably either still stuck in the Oxford one-way system or floating in the British Channel.
Yesterday, in London, England, a woman was convicted of a crime. She had read out the names of each British soldier who has dies in Iraq since the invasion, at the Cenotaph in London.
This was deemed to be a 'protest' and protests now have to be licensed within half a mile of our lawmakers, who complained that they didn't like them.
I think the various 'western' governments around the world are having a 'who can get their head furthest up their arse' competition. I'm really not sure who's winning.
Absolutely. In fact, the back button can be used programatically if you are clever enough. See google maps for an example of an Ajax app which still works perfectly woth the browser back button.
Slashdot Mirror
Bloody hell.
By engine form I meant internal vs external. And of course you could make a highly efficient diesel external combustion engine, you'd just need to pressurise the combustion chamber. Internal vs external refers to in the piston or out of it, not whether the burn takes place in a chamber or not.
And whether or not you void the water is again a design choice. A good engineer weighs up having to take on more water vs having to condense it and chooses. Please don't try to claim that one choise is right in all circumstances. (Have you ever seen a steam locomotive?)
Justin.
I think we are in violent agreement ;-)
;-)
If you read carefully though, Cringely doesn't even state the click rates were even. So there's not even enough data to support his own conclusion.
Incidentally, I would suggest even your test won't prove it, unless the two sites got the same click-throughs at different rates, because we know (well, we think) that google puts well-clicked-on sites higher, and there will be a feedback between high price and high click rate that creates higher apparent relevance. This will then skew the results when the prices are equalised.
Tricky stuff this, isn't it!
J.
I think you are confusing fuel and engine form. Diesel is just a fuel, it doesn't dictate the engine type.
;-). The downside is you have to carry around some other material (for the state change) which is typically voided rather than cooled and re-used.
The (only) difference between (1) internal and (2) external combustion is that the fuel energy is used to create an expansion due to (1) a chemical reaction and (2) a state change in some other material. The expansion is then used to drive a piston and after that it's all gears!
The biggest problem with internal combustion is that the heat of the reaction can't be avoided and is absolutely not wanted, so you have to carry around cooling systems. For external combustion the heat is exactly what you want, and it's pretty easy to obtain
So... there's no reason you couldn't make a highly efficient diesel external combustion (probably steam) engine.
In fact this hybrid is arguably pretty clever, as it uses the waste heat in one of the most efficient ways possible, as input to a steam engine! If the water runs out, the car continues on its merry way as a POICE (plain old internal combustion engine) - and a lot of gears!
Justin.
So it makes perfect sense to suggest that the algorithm is:
Established site @ 10c -> 15,000 clicks
New site @ 1$ -> prolly about 15,000 clicks because the high price counteracts the newness
New site @ 40c -> 1,200 clicks
None of which requires any penalty for change of adword price, only for newness. Unless we know how much 'up' a dollar a word will buy for a brand new site vs an established site, we have no reason to call foul.
In other words: unless he leaves the experiment running (or risks changing his old site), we have insufficient data to conclude that Google is evil.
Justin.
Chucky.
Clearly "floating in a most peculiar way" ;-)
Justin.
The only reason anyone in any vessel feels heavy is because the vessel is being accelerated relative to them. In a car, the wheels are in touch with the ground and that is the source of the (acceleration) force.
In a stationary lift, as for the car but with cables providing the force. In a plumetting lift, both are under the same acceleration (zero relative acceleration) and so one feels weightless. In a lift going up, one feels extra heavy.
So it doesn't matter where you are. If you're in a plane just above the ground and the wings fall off, you will feel weightless. If you are skydiving in a bubble you will feel weightless.
In other words... you were right, and both your posts should not be moderated +Anything informative!
Cheers,
Justin (Physic, Maths, Oracle and Java bunny).
Slashcode's prolly got a lame 34 character limit for the headline ;-)
J.
How do I know I'm talking to a basement-lurking slashdot nerd?
;-)
Well... I didn't. But I do now
J.
...how'd they take the close up photos of them making the lens?
J.
What are you pair talking about? A shyster can be any cheat:
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=shyster
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=shyster
Where did the Judaism ref com into things?
Justin.
Heh, they aren't offering a one customer per click service, and you got modded flame again! Gotta love it.
J.
AOL proxy.
Idiot.
Justin.
Riiiight. Obviously I need a better analogy for the hard of thinking.
Suppose it's a ten different people who come round at hourly intervals. And the leaflet guy's also giving out ten different lots of leaflets for different companies, one at a time. And the contract you have with the leaftlet guy doesn't mention only giving leaflets out to each person once. And you didn't tell him in advance not to do it.
Is he still wrong, or are you and the mods who declared you insightful smoking crack?
Justin.
Hey, Google never offered unique clicks. If they had, you'd have a point, but...
They can see IP addresses for clicks in their server referrer urls and thus they know that many are frauds (see slashdot et al passim for more info on fraudulent clicks).
Their complaint is effectively that google doesn't provide them with this info and so they have been asked to pay for X clicks when they would like to pay for Y distinct clicks.
They really have no case. Imagine a guy being paid to hand out leaflets in the street... suppose some other guy keeps walking back and forth taking a leaflet - is that the fault of the leaflet guy?
Justin.
I've heard about these... I totally agree with you. Time for a revolution, I think. What's that quote about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of the people? [I'd put a smiley here to indicate that in fact I do know the quote, but I'm feeling a bit grim for smileys.]
J.
More like every 24 hours. Even identity theives take the weekend off ;-)
J.
Effectively, as was known from the beginning, it leaves the decision of what is a protest in the hands of the police. Thus anyone doing anything that our lawmakers dislike - such as drawing attention to their misdeeds in any way - can become a crime (within that area).
Thus I conclude that all those who voted for the bill (including my MP Dr Alan Whitehead - Blair lackey, never rebelled or abstained - my letter to him on this is in the post), have their heads firmly inserted up their rectums, right down to the shoulder.
Justin.
According to the law, there are no innocent protests - within half a mile of parliament. Personally I'm not sure how they decide what a demonstration is...!
To put it another way, if I go and sit in Parliament Square wearing a T-shirt with "Iraq was Wrong" printed on it - or better yet "Bollocks to Blair" then I can be arrested for it. Have I deliberately broken a law and should face consequences? Effectively, it depends on what 'they' think was in my head.
I think that's a police state, myself, and I don't like it.
Justin.
She did it on October 25th 2005, and was convicted yesterday. The law is the Serious Crime and Police Act 2005, which criminalises 'demonstrating without a licence' within a half mile or so of parliament. Surf google news for the story, it's been well covered.
:(
Are we still allowed to say 'police state'?
J.
It's a simple, good idea.
Currently Thunderbird opens a new window for every email I want open (not previewed, open - I will be working with info in there for the next hour). This change makes a tabbed MDI version so they all share a window. I like this sort of thing. It reduces my screen clutter.
[Why the hell am I reading so many whinges about how this is unnecessary?!]
Justin.
I like your thinking, but I live in the UK. Here if we head in which ever direction we see a hawk flying, and don't stop for anything other than petrol for 500 miles, we're probably either still stuck in the Oxford one-way system or floating in the British Channel.
Maybe that's why the Pilgrim Fathers left.
Justin.
Yesterday, in London, England, a woman was convicted of a crime. She had read out the names of each British soldier who has dies in Iraq since the invasion, at the Cenotaph in London.
This was deemed to be a 'protest' and protests now have to be licensed within half a mile of our lawmakers, who complained that they didn't like them.
I think the various 'western' governments around the world are having a 'who can get their head furthest up their arse' competition. I'm really not sure who's winning.
Justin.
Absolutely. In fact, the back button can be used programatically if you are clever enough. See google maps for an example of an Ajax app which still works perfectly woth the browser back button.
Justin.