You are wrong. A molecule water vapour stays in the atmosphere few days on average, but a molecule of CO2 stays on average tens of years. Therefore, even though there is much less CO2 than water vapour, its change has more significant effect. Because of its short half-life in the atmosphere, water vapor is sometimes considered a feedback, not forcing. Amount of water vapour reacts quickly to the changes in temperature; not so with CO2.
I hate to pointing out the obvious, but it *is* a good thing. Of course, all the usual disclaimers apply. But if you take two different programs written by a programmer of same competence in same languages, the longer one will probably have more features. That's why we need the lines of code - we need the code to actually *do* something.
Habitable range for whom? Bacteria? Insects? Mammals? Man? Modern civilization?
The problem with AGW is not the change itself, it's its speed that is a problem. The question is if humanity can adapt to the change, and at which cost.
It's more code out there than one amateur can eat for life. And you know what? From the experience of people who wrote these programs, there isn't actually much people looking at it. I doubt that any scientific code will get many eyeballs. This is more a PR exercise.
I use netbook (EEE 901) every day in the subway, and there is no wireless. In fact, I don't use wireless on my netbook except I am at home (where I connect to my router, but since I also have a desktop, I don't do that often).
Either way, I prefer normal Ubuntu (customized a little to take less screen space) to UNR, so I don't care about this move.
What it comes down to is that the classical argument is a wrong calculation of total derivative. And not only the classical reasoning is wrong, it is also wrong empirically, experimentally, and from the game theory point of view.
Maybe not. I was at a business trip to America, and have never driven an automatic car before (or for that matter, a modern car - I have a very old, Eastern European car). I was very glad that the rental car guy explained everything to me (though I explicitly ask him to do that). So it not always the borrower's fault.
Actually, I think a lot of cues are inborn. When I was at the high school, I just assumed I don't have the people skills (or the talent), just because I spent time with computers more than other humans. But when I came out to the real world (at the university), I found out that my social skills are not bad at all. I can empathize with others, and I can understand them and react correctly most of the time. Yeah, there was some learning curve, but if you are smart and have balls (metaphorically), you will learn quickly. It's just a matter of focusing to that slightly - I am in the middle of extroversion scale now thanks to it (while I enjoy having fun with people, I still like programming - alone - better). Some people around me, who socialize, seem to have worse social skills than myself.
In other words, when I was younger, I considered computers to be logical and predictable, and humans very strange and unpredictable. Now, I find humans rather predictable (sometimes to the point it ceases to interest me), and I not so sure about the predictability of computers either.
Yes, I know reporting costs money. That's why I ask. How are they going to _convince_ me that my money is worth spending? For example, are they going to be more open about their process? Or what?
If they don't change anything in this respect, I can see nothing else than failure.
Maybe, what they could do, be more open about how investigations of _past_ stories went. That way, you could see for yourself (yet it wouldn't damage their current contacts etc.) that they are really investigating.
So, if they now will be behind a paywall, while other media are free, how are they going to convince us about their objectivity? Or why should people pay them?
To quote: "Moving right along, world-class software systems always have an extension language and a plug-in system — a way for programmers to extend the base functionality of the application. Sometimes plugins are called "mods". It's a way for your users to grow the system in ways the designer didn't anticipate.... Firefox has a plugin system. It's a real piece of crap, but it has one, and one thing you'll quickly discover if you build a plug-in system is that there will always be a few crazed programmers who learn to use it and push it to its limits. This may fool you into thinking you have a good plug-in system, but in reality it has to be both easy to use and possible to use without rebooting the system; Firefox breaks both of these cardinal rules, so it's in an unstable state: either it'll get fixed, or something better will come along and everyone will switch to that."
Several patients seated simultaneously? What third-world country this is? In Czech Republic, the dentists have a single patient at a time (there are actually two per patient -a dentist and a nurse).
The reason why we punish all these things is that we perceive them as unjust. Likewise, under normal circumstances, customers should perceive as unjust that they paid for something while someone pirated it. But in this case, they perceive as more unjust that they have to hoop through additional loops on top of that. It's a cure worse than a disease problem.
There is another myth that says just because something is mathematically unambiguous it also intuitively obvious. And yet the real implications may be lost in the complexity of the situation or problem. Comments can point out anything useful to the code reader.
Interesting. You just compared the "no comments in code" movement with formalism movement in mathematics. Since the latter was a spectacular failure in mathematics, I can predict (and hope) the former will be a failure too.
Slashdot Mirror
You are wrong. A molecule water vapour stays in the atmosphere few days on average, but a molecule of CO2 stays on average tens of years. Therefore, even though there is much less CO2 than water vapour, its change has more significant effect. Because of its short half-life in the atmosphere, water vapor is sometimes considered a feedback, not forcing. Amount of water vapour reacts quickly to the changes in temperature; not so with CO2.
Expand your horizons there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_z10_(microprocessor)
I hate to pointing out the obvious, but it *is* a good thing. Of course, all the usual disclaimers apply. But if you take two different programs written by a programmer of same competence in same languages, the longer one will probably have more features. That's why we need the lines of code - we need the code to actually *do* something.
At least, the submitter should have written an ending instead of a cliffhanger. Everybody knows that we don't read TFA here on Slashdot.
Habitable range for whom? Bacteria? Insects? Mammals? Man? Modern civilization?
The problem with AGW is not the change itself, it's its speed that is a problem. The question is if humanity can adapt to the change, and at which cost.
It's interesting story, but you are lucky that the Big Boss wasn't the original author.
I see - so you write it first, and then use the amount it took as an estimate! How clever!
While I am fan of open source and this idea in general, for climatology, this is a non-issue. Look there: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/
It's more code out there than one amateur can eat for life. And you know what? From the experience of people who wrote these programs, there isn't actually much people looking at it. I doubt that any scientific code will get many eyeballs. This is more a PR exercise.
Your OS is not beautiful. You would just spoil all this beauty Apple created for you.
Maybe they are going to award them to a corporation?
..since not one, but two new types of war were discovered with the Internet - cyberwar and flamewar.
I use netbook (EEE 901) every day in the subway, and there is no wireless. In fact, I don't use wireless on my netbook except I am at home (where I connect to my router, but since I also have a desktop, I don't do that often).
Either way, I prefer normal Ubuntu (customized a little to take less screen space) to UNR, so I don't care about this move.
And that theory has been proven logically inconsistent by Steve Keen. He wrote a paper about it with Russel Standish in Physica A: http://www.debunkingeconomics.com/Papers/Micro/KeenStandish2006_CritiqueNeoclassicalTheoryOfFirm_PhysicaA370pp81-85.pdf
What it comes down to is that the classical argument is a wrong calculation of total derivative. And not only the classical reasoning is wrong, it is also wrong empirically, experimentally, and from the game theory point of view.
Maybe not. I was at a business trip to America, and have never driven an automatic car before (or for that matter, a modern car - I have a very old, Eastern European car). I was very glad that the rental car guy explained everything to me (though I explicitly ask him to do that). So it not always the borrower's fault.
Actually, I think a lot of cues are inborn. When I was at the high school, I just assumed I don't have the people skills (or the talent), just because I spent time with computers more than other humans. But when I came out to the real world (at the university), I found out that my social skills are not bad at all. I can empathize with others, and I can understand them and react correctly most of the time. Yeah, there was some learning curve, but if you are smart and have balls (metaphorically), you will learn quickly. It's just a matter of focusing to that slightly - I am in the middle of extroversion scale now thanks to it (while I enjoy having fun with people, I still like programming - alone - better). Some people around me, who socialize, seem to have worse social skills than myself.
In other words, when I was younger, I considered computers to be logical and predictable, and humans very strange and unpredictable. Now, I find humans rather predictable (sometimes to the point it ceases to interest me), and I not so sure about the predictability of computers either.
Yeah, what was the name of that Monty Python sketch?
It's not really a scam, it's a black-box-as-a-service (BBaaS).
I personally look forward to cloud-as-a-service (CaaS).
I understand why you hope he isn't, but I don't understand why you also hope his wife isn't.
Anyway, if you are so nitpicky, don't you miss "an" before the "English teacher"? (I am not quite sure, English is not my first language.)
Yes, I know reporting costs money. That's why I ask. How are they going to _convince_ me that my money is worth spending? For example, are they going to be more open about their process? Or what?
If they don't change anything in this respect, I can see nothing else than failure.
Maybe, what they could do, be more open about how investigations of _past_ stories went. That way, you could see for yourself (yet it wouldn't damage their current contacts etc.) that they are really investigating.
So, if they now will be behind a paywall, while other media are free, how are they going to convince us about their objectivity? Or why should people pay them?
I think they recently added the PaperBag class (with WetPaperBag subclass) to the Java standard library just for the people mentioned above.
Now they can claim that nobody needs to know how to code their way out of the wet paper bag, since it's already available in Java.
Learn from the masters, young padawan:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/01/pinocchio-problem.html
To quote: ...
"Moving right along, world-class software systems always have an extension language and a plug-in system — a way for programmers to extend the base functionality of the application. Sometimes plugins are called "mods". It's a way for your users to grow the system in ways the designer didn't anticipate.
Firefox has a plugin system. It's a real piece of crap, but it has one, and one thing you'll quickly discover if you build a plug-in system is that there will always be a few crazed programmers who learn to use it and push it to its limits. This may fool you into thinking you have a good plug-in system, but in reality it has to be both easy to use and possible to use without rebooting the system; Firefox breaks both of these cardinal rules, so it's in an unstable state: either it'll get fixed, or something better will come along and everyone will switch to that."
Several patients seated simultaneously? What third-world country this is? In Czech Republic, the dentists have a single patient at a time (there are actually two per patient -a dentist and a nurse).
It holds water a bit, in fact.
The reason why we punish all these things is that we perceive them as unjust. Likewise, under normal circumstances, customers should perceive as unjust that they paid for something while someone pirated it. But in this case, they perceive as more unjust that they have to hoop through additional loops on top of that. It's a cure worse than a disease problem.
There is another myth that says just because something is mathematically unambiguous it also intuitively obvious. And yet the real implications may be lost in the complexity of the situation or problem. Comments can point out anything useful to the code reader.
Interesting. You just compared the "no comments in code" movement with formalism movement in mathematics. Since the latter was a spectacular failure in mathematics, I can predict (and hope) the former will be a failure too.