The motherfuckers force you to register to download PDFs. Even when it's stuff that's otherwise freely available. Oh and their Flash viewer is the worst UI I've encountered, c'm'on, a tiny widget with scrollbars, instead of opening my PDF viewer of choice, that's so frustrating I curse the fuckers for hours after I've been tricked into clicking a scribd URL. Will it be better with HTML5? I don't know, it will still be just as fucking useless.
There's nothing wrong with trying to make science look good. Great pictures/movies inspire people; I'd rather they be inspired by Hubble shots or Mars rover films than by Australian Roman torture snuff movies.
What we get back from current probes is surprisingly bland. I think it would go a long way towards making Mars real in the mind of people to have high-def moving pictures beamed back. Currently while we have very stunning photos, it's all very static. We have no feel of what the materials are like. This would make a major difference.
Where they predicted that dotcoms would replace brick and mortar (who uses that expression anymore?) shops, and that everybody would be on the internet?
Man, were they wrong. Amazon.com is a penny stock, and I'm pretty sure those Goggle guys are never gonna make any money from advertising.
Yeah, what does he know about computing and the future? After all he's just a long time Linux user, former sysadmin, Perl hacker and currently a very successful science fiction author. And a very good one at that. IMO the best current SF writer that I know of.
Just like the author denialists, you're just parroting talking points. Of course you don't care what national academies of sciences think, you only care what your masters think. Atta boy.
Any way, I was responding to the assertion that "Climategate" has proved anything. It hasn't.
That's just an appeal to credentials, that those who are the members of the right guild, union or club believe something. Again, completely irrelevant to whether something is scientifically correct or not
That's parroting typical of a right wing authoritarian. You people are no better than herd animals.
Nobody but you is saying that something is right because such or such authority says it is. I'm responding to the allegation that "Climategate" proved anything.
The only thing that is proven is that denialists are funded by the oil industry and the same "libertarians" funding the teabaggers, such as the bootstrappy Koch heirs.
At the end of the day, the opinion of the vast majority of scientists, and in paricular that of almost all climatologists, has not changed. A few years ago most national academies of sciences issued a joint statement supporting the IPCC, each with the overwhelming approval of their members. Has any of them gone back?
No, it's just fucking criminal PR bullshit, the same kind that was used to justify the Iraq war or implement liberticide "anti-terrorist" policies.
Do you think grad students were collecting data in the field on iPads in the 1980s?
Most of the data is probably in the form of moldy old penciled notebooks, core samples, B&W photo negatives and microscope slides. I hate to break it to you, but you know what, except maybe in physics or electrical engineering, not all experimental data was systematically recorded digitally until 15-20 years ago.
They collated, analyzed their data at the time, published their results in peer reviewed journals, and that was good enough. Now this judgement will require them to waste countless hours digging through old archives, scanning lab notebooks and so on, and for what? For one fucking idiot who apparently didn't even bother to read their latest paper in which they demonstrate that tree ring data for the trees they studied (oak or something) does not correlate with temperature but with summer rainfall.
Stealing is when you take something away from someone. When you copy something, the author still has it. Therefore it's not stealing. That doesn't mean it's not illegal. You can argue that it loses money to the author if you do it; but you can say the same thing about slander/libel/defamation. Surely if someone slanders a competitor, he stands to gain and the competitor to lose. Yet you're not calling it stealing, are you? Why don't you call copyright infringement slander, libel, or even identity theft or embezzlement? It's neither of those, anymore than it's stealing.
As @wikileaks keeps repeating on twitter, the authotisation to kill was given before any mention of an RPG. IIRC they only mentioned that they are "armed", which they admittedly are, since the amongst the victims were the bodyguards of the journalists. Unsurprisingly, bodyguards bear weapons in Iraq, and this was known since 2007
From memory (you can look it up on his blog). The NSA has come up with drastic requirements for key management for encryption, and every time the military encrypts something it has to obey them. That's not such a problem for control data, such as commands from the operator to the drone; but it's unusable for high bandwidth, high maintenance stuff like the video feed. Local support has to be able to access it, but they can't handle the requirements for key management; so they had to forgo encryption for that altogether. The solution would be for the NSA to establish another tier for encryption requirement with lesser requirements.
The circadian cycle is a PLL. It does not cause you to fall a sleep at a particular time, but it drives you towards one, based on a feedback loop, with input from light exposure, notably. It might be just bad habits.. or it might be that your circadian clock is out of phase.
It's a well known fact, has been publicised all over the place, and it took me a good 30s of googling for you to find this; not the exact same numbers but the rough ballpark.
He puts the Medicare overhead at nearly 6%, but I disagree on one major point, citing that premiums collection is done through the IRS and trying to put a price on this collection. But the point is that the IRS is already doing that kind of things, and it's very likely that if it wasn't collecting Medicare premiums it would still be doing almost the same amount of work and costing the same while not providing that service.
And it agrees that private insurers are wasting up to 30% on administrative costs, on individual plans, and he notes that the larger the pool, the smaller the overhead. From there it logically follows that single payer has even smaller overhead, and that's what we see in Europe.
One point he makes is interesting: But none of those wags, I'd wager, would prefer the small-group market to the large-group market. Others have argued that the difference in administration is that private insurers do an excellent job ferreting out fraud. unless you believe that only holds true for small business insurers, there's no evidence for that claim.
Slashdot Mirror
Because that wouldn't stand up in any court of law?
That festering pile of pus that is Scribd is not just copying works, it's altering them in such a way as to victimise both the users and the creator.
It needs to die, or at least to get out of Google's search results.
The motherfuckers force you to register to download PDFs. Even when it's stuff that's otherwise freely available. Oh and their Flash viewer is the worst UI I've encountered, c'm'on, a tiny widget with scrollbars, instead of opening my PDF viewer of choice, that's so frustrating I curse the fuckers for hours after I've been tricked into clicking a scribd URL. Will it be better with HTML5? I don't know, it will still be just as fucking useless.
There's nothing wrong with trying to make science look good. Great pictures/movies inspire people; I'd rather they be inspired by Hubble shots or Mars rover films than by Australian Roman torture snuff movies.
What we get back from current probes is surprisingly bland. I think it would go a long way towards making Mars real in the mind of people to have high-def moving pictures beamed back. Currently while we have very stunning photos, it's all very static. We have no feel of what the materials are like. This would make a major difference.
Where they predicted that dotcoms would replace brick and mortar (who uses that expression anymore?) shops, and that everybody would be on the internet?
Man, were they wrong. Amazon.com is a penny stock, and I'm pretty sure those Goggle guys are never gonna make any money from advertising.
And he runs vi on his iPhone.
Not quite the typical Apple fanboi I'm afraid.
How about a former programmer and science fiction writer?
Yeah, what does he know about computing and the future? After all he's just a long time Linux user, former sysadmin, Perl hacker and currently a very successful science fiction author. And a very good one at that. IMO the best current SF writer that I know of.
How much are you gonna pay for processing?
> I don't give a crap about the "climate evangelists" (whatever exactly that is).
I know who they are, they usually hang out in fields scaring crows.
Just like the author denialists, you're just parroting talking points. Of course you don't care what national academies of sciences think, you only care what your masters think. Atta boy.
Any way, I was responding to the assertion that "Climategate" has proved anything. It hasn't.
That's parroting typical of a right wing authoritarian. You people are no better than herd animals.
Nobody but you is saying that something is right because such or such authority says it is. I'm responding to the allegation that "Climategate" proved anything.
Now go back to your hole.
Fuck off. This is simply bullshit, and you know it. Exxon has given dozens if not hundreds of millions to denialists.
You scumbag reichwing corporate shills.
The only thing that is proven is that denialists are funded by the oil industry and the same "libertarians" funding the teabaggers, such as the bootstrappy Koch heirs.
At the end of the day, the opinion of the vast majority of scientists, and in paricular that of almost all climatologists, has not changed. A few years ago most national academies of sciences issued a joint statement supporting the IPCC, each with the overwhelming approval of their members. Has any of them gone back?
No, it's just fucking criminal PR bullshit, the same kind that was used to justify the Iraq war or implement liberticide "anti-terrorist" policies.
Do you think grad students were collecting data in the field on iPads in the 1980s?
Most of the data is probably in the form of moldy old penciled notebooks, core samples, B&W photo negatives and microscope slides. I hate to break it to you, but you know what, except maybe in physics or electrical engineering, not all experimental data was systematically recorded digitally until 15-20 years ago.
They collated, analyzed their data at the time, published their results in peer reviewed journals, and that was good enough. Now this judgement will require them to waste countless hours digging through old archives, scanning lab notebooks and so on, and for what? For one fucking idiot who apparently didn't even bother to read their latest paper in which they demonstrate that tree ring data for the trees they studied (oak or something) does not correlate with temperature but with summer rainfall.
Stealing is when you take something away from someone. When you copy something, the author still has it. Therefore it's not stealing. That doesn't mean it's not illegal. You can argue that it loses money to the author if you do it; but you can say the same thing about slander/libel/defamation. Surely if someone slanders a competitor, he stands to gain and the competitor to lose. Yet you're not calling it stealing, are you? Why don't you call copyright infringement slander, libel, or even identity theft or embezzlement? It's neither of those, anymore than it's stealing.
They made their point quite clearly.
They can't embed the codec and remain truly Free software.
Second, while they could link to platform-provided codecs, it's a support nightmare.
Third, it would legitimize patented crap.
As @wikileaks keeps repeating on twitter, the authotisation to kill was given before any mention of an RPG. IIRC they only mentioned that they are "armed", which they admittedly are, since the amongst the victims were the bodyguards of the journalists. Unsurprisingly, bodyguards bear weapons in Iraq, and this was known since 2007
From memory (you can look it up on his blog). The NSA has come up with drastic requirements for key management for encryption, and every time the military encrypts something it has to obey them. That's not such a problem for control data, such as commands from the operator to the drone; but it's unusable for high bandwidth, high maintenance stuff like the video feed. Local support has to be able to access it, but they can't handle the requirements for key management; so they had to forgo encryption for that altogether. The solution would be for the NSA to establish another tier for encryption requirement with lesser requirements.
For the Babylon 5 fan or something, if it's nicely printed.
that have no WMDs, you could indeed save a lot of money.
Phoenix321 just gave me the answer: to have no fucking clue whatsoever about stats and how scientists use them.
The circadian cycle is a PLL. It does not cause you to fall a sleep at a particular time, but it drives you towards one, based on a feedback loop, with input from light exposure, notably. It might be just bad habits .. or it might be that your circadian clock is out of phase.
It's a well known fact, has been publicised all over the place, and it took me a good 30s of googling for you to find this; not the exact same numbers but the rough ballpark.
He puts the Medicare overhead at nearly 6%, but I disagree on one major point, citing that premiums collection is done through the IRS and trying to put a price on this collection. But the point is that the IRS is already doing that kind of things, and it's very likely that if it wasn't collecting Medicare premiums it would still be doing almost the same amount of work and costing the same while not providing that service.
And it agrees that private insurers are wasting up to 30% on administrative costs, on individual plans, and he notes that the larger the pool, the smaller the overhead. From there it logically follows that single payer has even smaller overhead, and that's what we see in Europe.
One point he makes is interesting: But none of those wags, I'd wager, would prefer the small-group market to the large-group market. Others have argued that the difference in administration is that private insurers do an excellent job ferreting out fraud. unless you believe that only holds true for small business insurers, there's no evidence for that claim.
Because private insurers don't generate paperwork, they don't waste doctors' time by having them argue the need for a procedure over the phone ...
Right.