Wikileaks didn't release anything, they published information that was released to them by someone else. It should be noted that there has never been a case of someone successfully being prosecuted in the US for publishing leaked documents. The leaker, the one who actually violated an oath and removed those documents and gave them to someone else, that person should be punished. I wouldn't even argue against a treason case being brought against him or her. But trying to punish what is essentially a journalist, publishing information received from a source, is a very, very slippery slope for the US to start down.
As an example when we get a new student in at work, I've explained to them on various occasions when they were going to be dealing with someone who was an asshole, or someone who is incapable of following simple directions, and so on. I couldn't have those conversations if the person was listening in. I mean there isn't any way I could let a student know they are dealing with an asshole, no matter how diplomatic I was the asshole would get mad.
"Asshole" isn't exactly the height of diplomacy. You could try "fussy" or "particular" and instead of "incapable of following simple directions", try "creative" or "likes to have input".
It's actually very unprofessional to go around calling anyone an asshole in the workplace regardless of whether you face discipline for it. Chances are those students will remember you as "the guy who calls people assholes". When that pimply faced kid grows up he too may become what you classify as an asshole but with power over you. Or worse maybe he's not an "asshole" and just considers you too unprofessional to promote (or keep).
Christ what next declaring another stupid war, like 'the war on drugs'. How long before they start to censor sites with political views not approved by the government, or blocking sites deemed 'risks to national security'. I really get tired of my country trying to police and control everything. What ever happened to wanting more freedom.
Well since they're cracking down on pharmaceutical IP rights, perhaps they can call this "The war on the poor and sick or infirm".
Any way you cut it, this is pretty poor for a supposedly learned doctor.
If you've ever done peer reviews for a journal, then you'll know that it's not uncommon for papers to be submitted showing a woeful ignorance of other fields. The problem is not so much that the doctor wrote this, but that it was not returned with some very scathing peer reviews.
If you don't understand what your business is going to do, that's hundreds down the toilet, and you'll still be no more attractive to investors.
Marketers have no crystal ball. If they did, they would stay home and clip stock coupons. The most useful data is actually trying.
But trying to do what, Bruce? You have to at least have a vague direction. Starting a business if you have no knowledge or interest in managing one is a disaster. Starting a business without a business plan - even a fluid one - means you'll achieve nothing.
I never suggested they should become marketeers instead. Just that business suceess isn't, as you have suggested, just a matter of spending a few hundred dollars and aquiring a business name, then hoping to team up with someone more business savy. It requires a business plan, and goals...some kind of vague strategy...and the ability to learn from your mistakes and change those goals as opportunities arise. And then there's a lot of sweat. I've never heard of a lazy business person becoming successful.
I'm actually a little disappointe.d I'm use to more reasoned arguments from you, even if I don't always agree with them.
While the submitter here claims that this article is simply rediscovering the trapezoid rule, there's actually no such evidence given in the Abstract
You're right. he didn't make it all the way to trapezoids. He's combining triangles and retangles instead:
"total area under a curve is computed by dividing the area under the curve between two designated values on the X-axis (abscissas) into small segments (rectangles and triangles) whose areas can be accurately calculated from their respective geometrical formulas.:"
Any way you cut it, this is pretty poor for a supposedly learned doctor.
Really, I am already re-thinking my earlier reply.
The issue here is summed up in one word - "Just". You think you need "Just" a programmer, or "Just" a marketing guy, or "Just" a salesman? You have already told me that you don't really value their contribution to the effort, and additionally that you don't really understand fully what goes in to the work they're doing.
I just need a pony!...And 10 million dollars...And a red sports car...and...
I've met people who have excellent working software, and have had it for years, and simply aren't able to make a business out of it. They think I just need an investor! And this when it would take them hundreds of dollars to actually start their business, after which they'd have a lot more value to an investor, if they decided they still need one.
If you don't understand what your business is going to do, that's hundreds down the toilet, and you'll still be no more attractive to investors.
If she get's an iPhone she knows she can be on her own. It's not a fucking PC, it doesn't need a fucking support department. Android might need a factory reset and restore every once in a while. iPhone doesn't.
If you like iPhones that's your perorgative, but if you honestly believe the marketing slogan "it just works", you're brain dead.
I disagree. A terrible idea with a beautifully executed development goes no where. A great idea that is hacked together with shell scripts and kilometers of spaghetti code can make someone a fortune and (lame as it sounds) change the world.
Rubbish. Bad ideas sometimes succeed due to dumb luck. Great ideas hacked together with spit, glue, and duct tape tend to eventually fall apart.
If you want a good sustainable long term success you need both a good idea AND a good implementation.
So where is the extra appeal of Android to men coming from?
Uh, its right there in the name - android as in greek for man. If they wanted chicks to buy them they should have called then gynoids.
My wife will have what I'm willing to support, goddamnit! She can have it in pink and put whatever ringtones and wallpapers she likes on it. Chances are she'll come to me if she wants an app installed. She's not incompentent, just lazy and not interested in tech gear. So if I'm going to do the work for her, I'm not going to learn a whole other system just to support her phone. If she gets an iPhone she knows she's on her own.
Or just not tax that 1 trillion and let people buy what they want to with it. I can buy a gun if I'm afraid of terrerists or health insurance if I'm afraid of terrerbugs.
...Except that no one will insure you if you actually have or are likely to develop a medical issue.
Spending on anti-terrorism morbidly outstrips spending on terrorism. They fly a couple of planes into a buildings and the third largest country in the world spend over a trillion dollars on war and counter terrorism. As an added bonus, they get to laugh at our ridiculous countermeasures like fondling (or viewing nude) every man, woman, and child who commits suspicious activities like "boarding a plane".
If you spent 1 Trillion on health care, I wonder how many lives you'd save. Probably none. The health care professionals would just get newer sports cars. Cynical? Me? Never!
I predict the traffic will be really busy between 7am and 9am, and then again from 4pm to 6pm. Where do I pick up my prize?
When you can predict how Sydney's failing infrastructure affects the commute. I was late to work the other day (on late shift) because a water main burst on Paramatta Road and they blocked the road citybound for a couple of hours while they sorted out the mess. Sydney's roads and transport (and other infrastructure obviously) are so poorly planned and maintained that any algorithm that was remotely successful would need several good random number generators.
You don't think that he's an idiot, and that's why he avoids buying advertised stuff? 'Cause, that's what the sentence appears to say, and it seems plausible.
Granted it's ambiguous. The audience I care about can parse it to understand what I meant. Trolls, idiots and jokers I don't care so much about. Everyone's free to have a laugh.
"When a TrueView ad unit begins playing, you'll notice a five second countdown timer — as soon as that's up, you'll see an arrow that will let you skip the remainder of the ad and get back to the content you wanted to see, or you can choose to keep on watching the ad."
So at 5 seconds everyone participates in a no-opt-out survey on whether or not the ad interests them. No wonder advertisers like it! They get to sell their products to everyone for 5 seconds at a cut rate, to known-interested parties for X seconds at a normal rate, PLUS info on which ads get the most dropouts, least dropouts, and presumably WHEN they drop out.
I wouldn't mind ads nearly as much if they weren't a constant stream of brain dead insulting lies that assume I'm a moron. If you actually informed me about the product and didn't try to pretend it is the difference between being unhappy and dancing around on a beach with half naked supermodels, I might pay some attention. And while I'm whining, I wish they'd stop filling my mailbox LITERALLY every day with paper catalogs but then nickel and diming me for the cost of a filmsy thin plastic bag because they're "being green". I've actually come to resent ads. I actively avoid buying stuff I've seen advertised on the basis that I'm an idiot. The more ads and less decent programming on Youtube or any other media, the more likely I am just not to bother at all with it.
>These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.
That's your opinion, but it's someone else's rights you are talking about. If I said your rights should be abridged (not only copyright, but any rights) how would you respond? I find your tagline most ironic, because it seems you want other people to pick and choose which of your rights should be defended.
Copyright is not a natural right. It isn't even a moral right per say. It's a right afforded to a creator by society to give them incentive to create. It worked for a little while - in an age when information was slow to propagate and there was an abundance of new thought taking place. Today the idea of making knowledge public but still somehow owning it is idiotic. That information can circle the globe in seconds, and people are using copyright to stiffle creation instead.
Unless you are using a VCS that does mandatory per file locking, then you are conceptually branching every time you check out code, since before you check the code back in, somebody else could come along and check in other changes.
Sorry, but no. "Conceptually" branches and tags have very specific properties that aren't fulfilled by checking out. A key feature being that you can go back to a precise version of the whole code base which you have labelled (hopefully clearly).
Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks didn't release anything, they published information that was released to them by someone else. It should be noted that there has never been a case of someone successfully being prosecuted in the US for publishing leaked documents. The leaker, the one who actually violated an oath and removed those documents and gave them to someone else, that person should be punished. I wouldn't even argue against a treason case being brought against him or her. But trying to punish what is essentially a journalist, publishing information received from a source, is a very, very slippery slope for the US to start down.
Which is why they get accused of rape instead.
As an example when we get a new student in at work, I've explained to them on various occasions when they were going to be dealing with someone who was an asshole, or someone who is incapable of following simple directions, and so on. I couldn't have those conversations if the person was listening in. I mean there isn't any way I could let a student know they are dealing with an asshole, no matter how diplomatic I was the asshole would get mad.
"Asshole" isn't exactly the height of diplomacy. You could try "fussy" or "particular" and instead of "incapable of following simple directions", try "creative" or "likes to have input".
It's actually very unprofessional to go around calling anyone an asshole in the workplace regardless of whether you face discipline for it. Chances are those students will remember you as "the guy who calls people assholes". When that pimply faced kid grows up he too may become what you classify as an asshole but with power over you. Or worse maybe he's not an "asshole" and just considers you too unprofessional to promote (or keep).
Christ what next declaring another stupid war, like 'the war on drugs'. How long before they start to censor sites with political views not approved by the government, or blocking sites deemed 'risks to national security'. I really get tired of my country trying to police and control everything. What ever happened to wanting more freedom.
Well since they're cracking down on pharmaceutical IP rights, perhaps they can call this "The war on the poor and sick or infirm".
Any way you cut it, this is pretty poor for a supposedly learned doctor.
If you've ever done peer reviews for a journal, then you'll know that it's not uncommon for papers to be submitted showing a woeful ignorance of other fields. The problem is not so much that the doctor wrote this, but that it was not returned with some very scathing peer reviews.
Other fields!??!?!? This is HIGHSCHOOL math!!!
I didn't say "it just works", numb nuts.
Another sophisticated Apple fanboi. Think different
Marketers have no crystal ball. If they did, they would stay home and clip stock coupons. The most useful data is actually trying.
But trying to do what, Bruce? You have to at least have a vague direction. Starting a business if you have no knowledge or interest in managing one is a disaster. Starting a business without a business plan - even a fluid one - means you'll achieve nothing.
I never suggested they should become marketeers instead. Just that business suceess isn't, as you have suggested, just a matter of spending a few hundred dollars and aquiring a business name, then hoping to team up with someone more business savy. It requires a business plan, and goals...some kind of vague strategy...and the ability to learn from your mistakes and change those goals as opportunities arise. And then there's a lot of sweat. I've never heard of a lazy business person becoming successful.
I'm actually a little disappointe.d I'm use to more reasoned arguments from you, even if I don't always agree with them.
While the submitter here claims that this article is simply rediscovering the trapezoid rule, there's actually no such evidence given in the Abstract
You're right. he didn't make it all the way to trapezoids. He's combining triangles and retangles instead:
"total area under a curve is computed by dividing the area under the curve between two designated values on the X-axis (abscissas) into small segments (rectangles and triangles) whose areas can be accurately calculated from their respective geometrical formulas.:"
Any way you cut it, this is pretty poor for a supposedly learned doctor.
Really, I am already re-thinking my earlier reply.
The issue here is summed up in one word - "Just". You think you need "Just" a programmer, or "Just" a marketing guy, or "Just" a salesman? You have already told me that you don't really value their contribution to the effort, and additionally that you don't really understand fully what goes in to the work they're doing.
I just need a pony! ...And 10 million dollars ...And a red sports car ...and...
I've met people who have excellent working software, and have had it for years, and simply aren't able to make a business out of it. They think I just need an investor! And this when it would take them hundreds of dollars to actually start their business, after which they'd have a lot more value to an investor, if they decided they still need one.
If you don't understand what your business is going to do, that's hundreds down the toilet, and you'll still be no more attractive to investors.
If she get's an iPhone she knows she can be on her own. It's not a fucking PC, it doesn't need a fucking support department. Android might need a factory reset and restore every once in a while. iPhone doesn't.
If you like iPhones that's your perorgative, but if you honestly believe the marketing slogan "it just works", you're brain dead.
I disagree. A terrible idea with a beautifully executed development goes no where. A great idea that is hacked together with shell scripts and kilometers of spaghetti code can make someone a fortune and (lame as it sounds) change the world.
Rubbish. Bad ideas sometimes succeed due to dumb luck. Great ideas hacked together with spit, glue, and duct tape tend to eventually fall apart.
If you want a good sustainable long term success you need both a good idea AND a good implementation.
As for printing, you can use a 600dpi laser to output the whole bible in encoded format on 5 sheets of paper.
Yeah but how hard is it to encode something as repedative as blah blah begat blah blah begat blah blah....
So where is the extra appeal of Android to men coming from?
Uh, its right there in the name - android as in greek for man.
If they wanted chicks to buy them they should have called then gynoids.
My wife will have what I'm willing to support, goddamnit! She can have it in pink and put whatever ringtones and wallpapers she likes on it. Chances are she'll come to me if she wants an app installed. She's not incompentent, just lazy and not interested in tech gear. So if I'm going to do the work for her, I'm not going to learn a whole other system just to support her phone. If she gets an iPhone she knows she's on her own.
Already similar things out there but with robots, not pacman. Here's one of the more popular Java/.NET versions:
http://robocode.sourceforge.net/
This wasn't the first. There are a whole stack of them for the C language.
Or just not tax that 1 trillion and let people buy what they want to with it. I can buy a gun if I'm afraid of terrerists or health insurance if I'm afraid of terrerbugs.
...Except that no one will insure you if you actually have or are likely to develop a medical issue.
Spending on anti-terrorism morbidly outstrips spending on terrorism. They fly a couple of planes into a buildings and the third largest country in the world spend over a trillion dollars on war and counter terrorism. As an added bonus, they get to laugh at our ridiculous countermeasures like fondling (or viewing nude) every man, woman, and child who commits suspicious activities like "boarding a plane".
If you spent 1 Trillion on health care, I wonder how many lives you'd save. Probably none. The health care professionals would just get newer sports cars. Cynical? Me? Never!
But it's still a carbon-based life-form right?
It's life, Jim, but not as we know it.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by competence.
You mean incompetence. That is a stupid quote by the way because sometimes people are both incompetent and malicious.
I predict the traffic will be really busy between 7am and 9am, and then again from 4pm to 6pm.
Where do I pick up my prize?
When you can predict how Sydney's failing infrastructure affects the commute. I was late to work the other day (on late shift) because a water main burst on Paramatta Road and they blocked the road citybound for a couple of hours while they sorted out the mess. Sydney's roads and transport (and other infrastructure obviously) are so poorly planned and maintained that any algorithm that was remotely successful would need several good random number generators.
Translation: Judge's son/nephew owns modded Xbox. Nothing else to say.
You don't think that he's an idiot, and that's why he avoids buying advertised stuff? 'Cause, that's what the sentence appears to say, and it seems plausible.
Granted it's ambiguous. The audience I care about can parse it to understand what I meant. Trolls, idiots and jokers I don't care so much about. Everyone's free to have a laugh.
"When a TrueView ad unit begins playing, you'll notice a five second countdown timer — as soon as that's up, you'll see an arrow that will let you skip the remainder of the ad and get back to the content you wanted to see, or you can choose to keep on watching the ad."
So at 5 seconds everyone participates in a no-opt-out survey on whether or not the ad interests them. No wonder advertisers like it! They get to sell their products to everyone for 5 seconds at a cut rate, to known-interested parties for X seconds at a normal rate, PLUS info on which ads get the most dropouts, least dropouts, and presumably WHEN they drop out.
I wouldn't mind ads nearly as much if they weren't a constant stream of brain dead insulting lies that assume I'm a moron. If you actually informed me about the product and didn't try to pretend it is the difference between being unhappy and dancing around on a beach with half naked supermodels, I might pay some attention. And while I'm whining, I wish they'd stop filling my mailbox LITERALLY every day with paper catalogs but then nickel and diming me for the cost of a filmsy thin plastic bag because they're "being green". I've actually come to resent ads. I actively avoid buying stuff I've seen advertised on the basis that I'm an idiot. The more ads and less decent programming on Youtube or any other media, the more likely I am just not to bother at all with it.
Please don't show them to me, you're just wasting my time and your bandwidth.
I guess you'll just have to skip YouTube :(
>These works have been forgotten about a long time ago. They should have been in public domain since nobody is profiting from them anymore.
That's your opinion, but it's someone else's rights you are talking about. If I said your rights should be abridged (not only copyright, but any rights) how would you respond? I find your tagline most ironic, because it seems you want other people to pick and choose which of your rights should be defended.
Copyright is not a natural right. It isn't even a moral right per say. It's a right afforded to a creator by society to give them incentive to create. It worked for a little while - in an age when information was slow to propagate and there was an abundance of new thought taking place. Today the idea of making knowledge public but still somehow owning it is idiotic. That information can circle the globe in seconds, and people are using copyright to stiffle creation instead.
Unless you are using a VCS that does mandatory per file locking, then you are conceptually branching every time you check out code, since before you check the code back in, somebody else could come along and check in other changes.
Sorry, but no. "Conceptually" branches and tags have very specific properties that aren't fulfilled by checking out. A key feature being that you can go back to a precise version of the whole code base which you have labelled (hopefully clearly).