While this finding is interesting it's not the first time neuroscientists have found complicated functions being performed in the retina of non-primates; the extrapolation in the summary to implications on human vision is a bit of stretch. Mice have poor high-frequency vision, but they can sort of make up for it with vision that's sensitive to motion. Many others mammal have this feature as well (rabbits, cats, etc).
Data show that having children decreases happiness.
Since when were scientists ever concerned about happiness. If they were, they wouldn't be in such an often-unrewarded (financially, emotionally, etc.) profession. Scientists are happiest when they can bring some sort of meaning and structure to what appears to be chaos. Arguably, children are the ultimate form of chaos!
They also eat a lot of your time (which could be better spent doing science)
No doubt. I'd wager that the majority of the most successful scientists (in terms of publications, innovations, peer respect, etc) are that way because they devote the vast majority of their time to science and nothing else.
and they're extremely expensive (scientists don't get paid that much).
Children can cost plenty but our memory is selective; we often ignore the constant "cons" for a few blissful, and unfortunately infrequent, "pros". In the end, you're probably right that logically, people that make science their raison d'être shouldn't have children. Fortunately for society, these people do as they often encourage the next batch of new scientists...
It's one thing to monitor traffic for things like accidents and traffic jams, but NYC traffic is its own beast. While there are certain times of the day (morning/evening rush periods, midday lunch, etc) when there is heavy congestion that lasts for an hour at a time, a lot of times you get these little jams due to someone double parking, etc that lasts for 25-30 minutes tops. And they're more or less randomly distributed around the residential areas of Manhattan. Constantly rerouting to avoid these situations in NYC sounds like a nightmare. For instance, you could avoid all the congestion but take a circuitous route (25-30 minutes local - downtown to uptown), or you could sit through 10 minutes of congestion to get onto the FDR or West Side Highway + 15 minutes of driving. In the end, you're better off just listening to the cabbie for advice. While it's possible he might want to rip you off, more often than not, he wants to get you to your location fast for A) a better tip and B) so he can get more cab hires a day.
There are numerous monocular depth cues available, but you won't "see" in 3D; you'll just know you're viewing a 3D world. The answer to you question depends on what exactly you're referring to by "simulate 3d."
If it's just depth perception, then.. you can use motion parallax, occlusion, kinetic depth perception (when objects change size, while your viewpoint remains fixed), perspective lines, spatial frequency/texture gradients, etc..
The nose bridge pieces seen in this photo can be installed on the glasses and vary the height at which the glasses sit on your face. If you use standard glasses on a normal basis these bridges will allow you to use the NVIDIA 3D Vision glasses over them.
Which is why one should only use ECMAScipt.. No more confusion. Unfortunately, more people rather just use the Javascript sublanguage (is that even a word? Maybe dialect?).
>More to the point, causation is highly correlated with correlation (rho=0.977).
Interesting study, but I find it odd that the end result defies logic. Their relationship claims it's possible to have 0.05% causation with 0.00% correlation?! (note the offset in their y-intercept). Am I missing something?
And what the hell is that journal?
"Forthcoming in the International Journal of Observeration, Knowledge and Evidence, Vol. 27 (December, 2007)."
Basic searching came up with nothing. Does it even exist?
My year old+ Nokia N95 does that (assuming you use the TV out cable that came with it and any ordinary bluetooth keyboard). Never tried a bluetooth mouse though...
Did anyone here read the CNN/FORTUNE article that the Android Authority article referred to?
Where in the original article does it actually mention T-mobile/Google will be using ads?
The author of the Fortune article states:
Should T-Mobile decide to offer free Gmail access, it would be seen as a big counter move to Research in Motionâ(TM)s (RIMM) BlackBerry e-mail service, which costs $15 a month extra. And if telcos embrace Googleâ(TM)s ad-supported free e-mail, it could help drive Googleâ(TM)s ultimate aim to spread its successful desktop advertising business to mobile phones.
He said if not when. And while Gmail may be ad-supported, their current lineup of mobile based email clients are not. At least I've never seen an ad on my gmail java-based client on my phone. Or any other google mobile product (gmaps, gmail, etc).
Is t-mobile going to ask Google to develop a T-mobile specific client (with a hardcoded encrypted access point) that purposely injects ads? If so, it's nothing that's ever been confirmed by t-mobile, or google. Just the thoughts of the author based on presumably how gmail works on the web.
Email usually requires a data plan of some sort, which usually isn't free. Using ala cart SMS is usually cheaper than signing up for a data plan if you plan to send less than 25-30 messages a month. Plus SMS messages are received without user intervention or setup. Now some of us have push-email that allows us to receive email (or be notified of email) as soon as it hits our inbox, but I doubt the average joe shmoe has it. On the other hand, I'm sure he probably has an SMS equipped phone if it's been bought in the last 4-5 years.
Consider this: What's point of a $150/mo 50/5 service if a 250gb bandwidth cap could conceivably be consumed in a little over 48 hours?
Many people are concerned with out fast their data is transferred than the amount. I doubt my parents would ever go past a 250GB cap, yet get easily frustrated viewing online photo albums that take a long time to come over. For many, America is all about instant gratification, and fast speeds fulfill this - from video-on-demand to high quality streaming music. Comcast is merely catering to the crowd that wants stuff NOW but not necessarily often. But I agree, it should have been advertised as such.
Why not just assign each customer/member a flashdrive during signup, which each drive having a unique serial ID.
Then they can just go to the local Blockbuster, use a kiosk to download a movie, come back home and watch it. When they're done, there's nothing to return since the DRM that's encoding on to the movie files prevents the end user from playing that movie again after say.. a week. Blockbuster would only need a kiosk that can take a raw movie, encapsulate it with drm based on the flash drive serial key of the member using it. Doesn't seem so hard. Hell, it could just be a premium service that charges the customer $XX at initial membership. For that he/she would get discounted prices at the kiosk and never worry about a movie being out of stock. hrm.. Sorta like to the old Divx scheme people had in the past, but with reusable media.
Granted the only reason this is better than using the internet to get the movie is SPEED. USB transfer speeds of flash drives + time to the store usually are much shorter than the download speeds of the average customer.
While it's not always an issue to those that care about the final result, I wonder how much power this sucker is gonna drain from the local power grid. I can see it now.. A prof making a call to the local power company, telling them, "Please be advised, we're gonna black out Urbana-Champaign for the next couple of minutes." Too bad they decommissioned that research nuclear reactor they had back in the '98. While it never was used for electricity, it probably could have been fitted. Then again, with all the wind they're used to, maybe a couple of wind turbines would be sufficient.
And for all intensive purposes (commercially available chips/cards), any single Nvidia and ATI card will outperform any of Intel's current offerings (sli'ed or not).
Unless it's not intensive.
But it's not intensive, why bother with SLI? Does SLI save power, cost, etc? I was under the assumption that the only reason to SLI was that the end cost of using two lower performing GPUs was less than the cost/availablity of a higher performing GPU.
Because, at least in my neck of the woods, there are still many who wish it had gone the other way. Many who would rather give the woman thing a go first...Now McCain gets to tap into that vibe, and probably shore up at least a few of those voters that would have preferred Hillary over Obama. They didn't really WANT to vote McCain before, but they would have just for the woman factor, and because they have some kind of irrational hatred for Obama. Now they've been handed a reason to want to vote for him, too.
Do you really think women are going to fall for it? I think the resentment that we've seen recently will die down before November. It seems to me that the women that wanted Hillary to be president are generally characterized as independent women themselves (prochoice, proequal pay, etc). I realize many feel betrayed by their traditional party. What I don't understand is why they would think the republicans are going to be any better? Their views are vastly different. While McCain might be more "maverick", do they really believe he's going to support their primary beliefs more than Obama? I think some of them claim that by electing McCain, it will teach the DNC a lession and hell.. it's only four years. But when the debates (and probably the new round of ads) make it evident that the next president will most likely choose up to 4 supreme court justices, they'll realize that choosing a candidate based on resentment will bite them in the ass for a long time to come. Then again, who knows.. I've given up hoping for rational voters.:P
That's all fine and dandy but there's a problem. How does one separate Bush's "private" mail from his "offical/public" mail? Do we just implicitly trust him to mark his email appropriately? In the end, he's a public official and email sent from his office as a public official should be available. If he really wanted to privately send some email/messages, I'm sure as President, he'd have access to better means than the official mail server.
Intel wants the SLI certification so that their chipsets can support SLI'ed NVidia based cards, just as how they currently support Crossfire'd ATI video cards. While Intel does make graphics chipsets, I wasn't under the impression they were attempting to SLI their own GPUs.
And for all intensive purposes (commercially available chips/cards), any single Nvidia and ATI card will outperform any of Intel's current offerings (sli'ed or not).
And then your system could literally explode in a catastrophic fireball due to an electrical surge because mineral oil (or whatever the hell other oil your existing immersion-cooled computer uses) is highly flammable. Whereas Fluorinert is not flammable at all.
Wouldn't the short or spark have to be on the surface of the machine? Since there would be presumably very little oxygen to get the fire started, I'm not sure how an overloaded circuit board would ignite a tank of mineral oil. Or am I missing something?
Slashdot Mirror
While this finding is interesting it's not the first time neuroscientists have found complicated functions being performed in the retina of non-primates; the extrapolation in the summary to implications on human vision is a bit of stretch. Mice have poor high-frequency vision, but they can sort of make up for it with vision that's sensitive to motion. Many others mammal have this feature as well (rabbits, cats, etc).
Data show that having children decreases happiness.
Since when were scientists ever concerned about happiness. If they were, they wouldn't be in such an often-unrewarded (financially, emotionally, etc.) profession. Scientists are happiest when they can bring some sort of meaning and structure to what appears to be chaos. Arguably, children are the ultimate form of chaos!
They also eat a lot of your time (which could be better spent doing science)
No doubt. I'd wager that the majority of the most successful scientists (in terms of publications, innovations, peer respect, etc) are that way because they devote the vast majority of their time to science and nothing else.
and they're extremely expensive (scientists don't get paid that much).
Children can cost plenty but our memory is selective; we often ignore the constant "cons" for a few blissful, and unfortunately infrequent, "pros". In the end, you're probably right that logically, people that make science their raison d'être shouldn't have children. Fortunately for society, these people do as they often encourage the next batch of new scientists...
Excuse my ignorance but...
Are hydrophilic substances necessarily oleophobic? I would think any substance that's sufficiently hydrophilic will repel nonpolar molecules.
Why not just use a phone that supports Google Latitude? http://www.google.com/latitude/intro.html. All the work has been done for you.
Why run Matlab when you can run Octave?
Because Octave isn't 100% compatible (see http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/FAQ.html#MATLAB-compatibility), and regardless of whether it deserves it, Matlab is still the standard in a bunch of fields.
It's one thing to monitor traffic for things like accidents and traffic jams, but NYC traffic is its own beast. While there are certain times of the day (morning/evening rush periods, midday lunch, etc) when there is heavy congestion that lasts for an hour at a time, a lot of times you get these little jams due to someone double parking, etc that lasts for 25-30 minutes tops. And they're more or less randomly distributed around the residential areas of Manhattan. Constantly rerouting to avoid these situations in NYC sounds like a nightmare. For instance, you could avoid all the congestion but take a circuitous route (25-30 minutes local - downtown to uptown), or you could sit through 10 minutes of congestion to get onto the FDR or West Side Highway + 15 minutes of driving. In the end, you're better off just listening to the cabbie for advice. While it's possible he might want to rip you off, more often than not, he wants to get you to your location fast for A) a better tip and B) so he can get more cab hires a day.
You mean like this? http://slog.thestranger.com/files/2007/10/483225120_62bbc45b36_m.jpg Not sure how much more of a flaming skull you can get. ;)
There are numerous monocular depth cues available, but you won't "see" in 3D; you'll just know you're viewing a 3D world. The answer to you question depends on what exactly you're referring to by "simulate 3d."
If it's just depth perception, then.. you can use motion parallax, occlusion, kinetic depth perception (when objects change size, while your viewpoint remains fixed), perspective lines, spatial frequency/texture gradients, etc..
FTA:
The nose bridge pieces seen in this photo can be installed on the glasses and vary the height at which the glasses sit on your face. If you use standard glasses on a normal basis these bridges will allow you to use the NVIDIA 3D Vision glasses over them.
Glass wearers should be fine..
Unfortunately, the Nobel prizes cannot be awarded posthumously, unless they died after the nomination process.
Which is why one should only use ECMAScipt.. No more confusion. Unfortunately, more people rather just use the Javascript sublanguage (is that even a word? Maybe dialect?).
>More to the point, causation is highly correlated with correlation (rho=0.977).
Interesting study, but I find it odd that the end result defies logic. Their relationship claims it's possible to have 0.05% causation with 0.00% correlation?! (note the offset in their y-intercept). Am I missing something?
And what the hell is that journal?
"Forthcoming in the International Journal of Observeration, Knowledge and Evidence, Vol. 27 (December, 2007)."
Basic searching came up with nothing. Does it even exist?
anyhoo...
Yes it's true that correlation does not always equal causation, but causation does tend to result in correlation.
err. it's a bit more than "tend to result in"
If causation, then correlation.
or equivalently...
If no correlation, than no causation.
My year old+ Nokia N95 does that (assuming you use the TV out cable that came with it and any ordinary bluetooth keyboard). Never tried a bluetooth mouse though...
Did anyone here read the CNN/FORTUNE article that the Android Authority article referred to?
Where in the original article does it actually mention T-mobile/Google will be using ads?
The author of the Fortune article states:
Should T-Mobile decide to offer free Gmail access, it would be seen as a big counter move to Research in Motionâ(TM)s (RIMM) BlackBerry e-mail service, which costs $15 a month extra. And if telcos embrace Googleâ(TM)s ad-supported free e-mail, it could help drive Googleâ(TM)s ultimate aim to spread its successful desktop advertising business to mobile phones.
He said if not when. And while Gmail may be ad-supported, their current lineup of mobile based email clients are not. At least I've never seen an ad on my gmail java-based client on my phone. Or any other google mobile product (gmaps, gmail, etc).
Is t-mobile going to ask Google to develop a T-mobile specific client (with a hardcoded encrypted access point) that purposely injects ads? If so, it's nothing that's ever been confirmed by t-mobile, or google. Just the thoughts of the author based on presumably how gmail works on the web.
Email usually requires a data plan of some sort, which usually isn't free. Using ala cart SMS is usually cheaper than signing up for a data plan if you plan to send less than 25-30 messages a month. Plus SMS messages are received without user intervention or setup. Now some of us have push-email that allows us to receive email (or be notified of email) as soon as it hits our inbox, but I doubt the average joe shmoe has it. On the other hand, I'm sure he probably has an SMS equipped phone if it's been bought in the last 4-5 years.
Consider this: What's point of a $150/mo 50/5 service if a 250gb bandwidth cap could conceivably be consumed in a little over 48 hours?
Many people are concerned with out fast their data is transferred than the amount. I doubt my parents would ever go past a 250GB cap, yet get easily frustrated viewing online photo albums that take a long time to come over. For many, America is all about instant gratification, and fast speeds fulfill this - from video-on-demand to high quality streaming music. Comcast is merely catering to the crowd that wants stuff NOW but not necessarily often. But I agree, it should have been advertised as such.
Why not just assign each customer/member a flashdrive during signup, which each drive having a unique serial ID.
Then they can just go to the local Blockbuster, use a kiosk to download a movie, come back home and watch it. When they're done, there's nothing to return since the DRM that's encoding on to the movie files prevents the end user from playing that movie again after say.. a week. Blockbuster would only need a kiosk that can take a raw movie, encapsulate it with drm based on the flash drive serial key of the member using it. Doesn't seem so hard. Hell, it could just be a premium service that charges the customer $XX at initial membership. For that he/she would get discounted prices at the kiosk and never worry about a movie being out of stock. hrm.. Sorta like to the old Divx scheme people had in the past, but with reusable media.
Granted the only reason this is better than using the internet to get the movie is SPEED. USB transfer speeds of flash drives + time to the store usually are much shorter than the download speeds of the average customer.
While it's not always an issue to those that care about the final result, I wonder how much power this sucker is gonna drain from the local power grid. I can see it now.. A prof making a call to the local power company, telling them, "Please be advised, we're gonna black out Urbana-Champaign for the next couple of minutes." Too bad they decommissioned that research nuclear reactor they had back in the '98. While it never was used for electricity, it probably could have been fitted. Then again, with all the wind they're used to, maybe a couple of wind turbines would be sufficient.
Unless it's not intensive.
But it's not intensive, why bother with SLI? Does SLI save power, cost, etc? I was under the assumption that the only reason to SLI was that the end cost of using two lower performing GPUs was less than the cost/availablity of a higher performing GPU.
Because, at least in my neck of the woods, there are still many who wish it had gone the other way. Many who would rather give the woman thing a go first...Now McCain gets to tap into that vibe, and probably shore up at least a few of those voters that would have preferred Hillary over Obama. They didn't really WANT to vote McCain before, but they would have just for the woman factor, and because they have some kind of irrational hatred for Obama. Now they've been handed a reason to want to vote for him, too.
Do you really think women are going to fall for it? I think the resentment that we've seen recently will die down before November. It seems to me that the women that wanted Hillary to be president are generally characterized as independent women themselves (prochoice, proequal pay, etc). I realize many feel betrayed by their traditional party. What I don't understand is why they would think the republicans are going to be any better? Their views are vastly different. While McCain might be more "maverick", do they really believe he's going to support their primary beliefs more than Obama? I think some of them claim that by electing McCain, it will teach the DNC a lession and hell.. it's only four years. But when the debates (and probably the new round of ads) make it evident that the next president will most likely choose up to 4 supreme court justices, they'll realize that choosing a candidate based on resentment will bite them in the ass for a long time to come. Then again, who knows.. I've given up hoping for rational voters. :P
Private stuff should stay private.
That's all fine and dandy but there's a problem. How does one separate Bush's "private" mail from his "offical/public" mail? Do we just implicitly trust him to mark his email appropriately? In the end, he's a public official and email sent from his office as a public official should be available. If he really wanted to privately send some email/messages, I'm sure as President, he'd have access to better means than the official mail server.
Intel wants the SLI certification so that their chipsets can support SLI'ed NVidia based cards, just as how they currently support Crossfire'd ATI video cards. While Intel does make graphics chipsets, I wasn't under the impression they were attempting to SLI their own GPUs.
And for all intensive purposes (commercially available chips/cards), any single Nvidia and ATI card will outperform any of Intel's current offerings (sli'ed or not).
And then your system could literally explode in a catastrophic fireball due to an electrical surge because mineral oil (or whatever the hell other oil your existing immersion-cooled computer uses) is highly flammable. Whereas Fluorinert is not flammable at all.
Wouldn't the short or spark have to be on the surface of the machine? Since there would be presumably very little oxygen to get the fire started, I'm not sure how an overloaded circuit board would ignite a tank of mineral oil. Or am I missing something?
Looks like Manhattan isn't well covered. I know my apartment complex down in the NOHO/SOHO region isn't covered yet.
According to:
http://www.dslreports.com/gmaps/fios
It seems as if brooklyn and queens are better covered.