I always thought that the submitted date was when it was first submitted before review and assumed that the long time between then and publication reflected such things as the infrequency of publication, backlogs in the schedule, revision prompted by the review.
I am surprised therefore to find now that it is also because the experiments are being repeated as part of the process.
Many papers appear to be the results of experiments with long timeframes, or which arise in the course of program of work or may be based on data that is not commonly available.
Perhaps in your field it is possible to repeat experiments at low or no cost in a short timeframe but I can't see how a significant proportion of peer reviewed articles have had their underlying experimental work repeated in the review (especially in Physics).
But according to creation scientists it has slowed down from infinity to its current speed in 6000 years. At that rate we have about 2 years left before I can beat it on my pushbike.
Or has it stopped slowing down now. If so why, Dr Brown.
I am not a peer reviewing scientist but I don't think they re-do any experiments while reviewing. That would be impossible in many cases as the experiments sometimes take years and also there is nothing in it for them if they confirm an experiment in those circumstances cause they won't get any credit.
All they do is make sure the stuff looks OK and has no obvious errors, is not internally inconsistant or doesn't actually support the conclusion. This would be especially so where the conclusions are so at odds with established thought.
They often wouldn't agree with the article itself but accept it for publication as a basis for further discussion and work.
It tends to be where the media hype a report with the 'time travel' and end of the worldism stuff that this stuff startsd to look dumb.
BTW Paul Davies is a very respected physicist and if his name is on the paper it should not be disregarded out of hand. He is also a great populariser of science and has written a number of books for the general public on physics.
FWIW, MYOB is an Australian company but it acquired MYOB from a Canadian company. It's big in Australia for sure in the small business sector but at a demo of the latest release they said that about half of total revenue came from Overseas sales.
They also have a strong Mac version if I'm not mistaken.
The MYOB engine is fairly old and in need of upgrading. It essentially hasn't changed for a few years so maybe it would be simple to migrate to wine. It might evn run on crossover if crossover understands older calls.
But the thread so far deals pretty much wholly with situations where the people getting patted down aren't Brown. And the Brown ones aren't getting patted down.
So unless White is the new Brown how this is insightfull I am at a loss to understand. It isn't even that funny.
For the life of me I can't see how any vested interest or industry group will make money out of this bill so I don't understand why he is introducing it.
I mean who's paying for this law. I think we should be told. Unless it is transparent and can be called industry assistance, for some reasson people think corruption is a very bad thing and should be stopped.
poster wrote what a company did. I can't see any opinion expressed at all in the post, pure reportage. Is the poster an arsehole because they didn't rant how undemocratic it is that the company has that policy or just because they can string together more than six words.
Yeah, how can you believe in God when he lets 20 year old minor celebrity rock stars die in car accidents and aeroplane accidents as if they were just like, ya know, ummm, people or something. geez doesn't gettin your face on the cover of RS count for anything these days.
I'm sorry if you took my post that way. I certainly didn't to mean to imply that cattle prods weilded by US authority are any less reprehensible than boiling oil used by foreign torturers.
It's just that I don't believe that cattle prods to the testicles are the usual response in the USA to complaints about political process or voting for the wrong candidate as is clearly the case in many other countries.
To use the term totalitarian police state in reference to the USA (and in fact all representative democracies)is a slap in the face to those who live in states that are more likely to be seen as such by any reasonable definition.
By your definition all countries are totalitarian police states at least which makes the term meaningless. It behoves you therefore to come up with a term that we can use for places that are even more awful than the awful USA now that you have neutered totalitarian police state.
are you kidding? an iris image is converted to a data stream and sent to a central database or a derived template is sent. what's the difference. either one is compared to another datastream. inversion is irellevant.
your argument is just like saying 'don't worry, they don't keep you iris really, only a photo of it and it can't be converted back to an iris. They'd have to take your whole eye to comprimise your identity'
I'd have though it really simple to insert a template into an ident function and crack anything at all.
The only way i can see these things being unbreakable is if a team of humans check the iris face to face so no hacking of digital data and no second set of eyteballs. But even then you got potential problems with corrupt employees.
I thought that was the least fututristic bit of the whole movie but also thought that unless the machines could read your emotions there would be a shitload of broken retinal scanners around if not smoking holes where advertising agencies used to be.
I think the RIAA and the MPAA have proved that not owning something now is no impediment to not owning something forever from next week on if the right senators can be persuaded.
Clearly though, the question is one of control. Who has or should have control of that information.
And this forum is host to many discussions about ownership or control of information which seeks to be free.
IANAL so I'll ask Can I copyright my retinal pattern so any non-consenting use is subject to action for recovery of gains made by the infringing party, ie if someone sells my retinal pattern I can get the money (plus damages).
then your perspective is very skewed. go ask someone in north korea or mainland china or even malaysia what a police state feels like. illusionary safety?? illusionary??? are you out of your mind.
Calling the US a totalatarian police state shows little understanding of just what the whole thing is about.
I don't live there and I'm not a big fan of all it does but maybe I have a clearer perspective of what it represents than some of the selfish little saddo "poor-me's" who actually live there.
these guys are gonna light the blue touch paper and retire to a safe distance. that might count as dangerous in nevada but i don't see too many of them getting hurt if they got a long enough wick.
The thing that annoys me about the reporting of these things is the implication that they are getting closer each time. As in 'the next one will surely hit us look how close they're getting.'
The chances of getting hit by one that is big enough to have a significant effect are very small and I'm not sure the cost is worth it. Sure look for the really big ones which presumably easier to spot but looking for every one that might do some damage will be expensive.
Then again I'm not american and so it's not my money and they'de only really be looking for the ones that might hit usa.
As the saying goes 'If an asteroid falls in rawanda does anyone care'
damn, i thought it was funny but now that i know they used to use other photos i reread this weeks issue and your right, it's not as funny. i'll never read it again.
Slashdot Mirror
"If I could do that I wouldn't have gotten a Nobel Prize for it"
Don't know if its true or apocryphal but it fits.
I am surprised therefore to find now that it is also because the experiments are being repeated as part of the process.
Many papers appear to be the results of experiments with long timeframes, or which arise in the course of program of work or may be based on data that is not commonly available.
Perhaps in your field it is possible to repeat experiments at low or no cost in a short timeframe but I can't see how a significant proportion of peer reviewed articles have had their underlying experimental work repeated in the review (especially in Physics).
Or has it stopped slowing down now. If so why, Dr Brown.
All they do is make sure the stuff looks OK and has no obvious errors, is not internally inconsistant or doesn't actually support the conclusion. This would be especially so where the conclusions are so at odds with established thought.
They often wouldn't agree with the article itself but accept it for publication as a basis for further discussion and work.
It tends to be where the media hype a report with the 'time travel' and end of the worldism stuff that this stuff startsd to look dumb.
BTW Paul Davies is a very respected physicist and if his name is on the paper it should not be disregarded out of hand. He is also a great populariser of science and has written a number of books for the general public on physics.
The day of the paperless office will arrive the day after the day of the paperless toilet.
They also have a strong Mac version if I'm not mistaken.
The MYOB engine is fairly old and in need of upgrading. It essentially hasn't changed for a few years so maybe it would be simple to migrate to wine. It might evn run on crossover if crossover understands older calls.
no, you suck
I love a good paradox but this is getting a bit ridiculous.
So unless White is the new Brown how this is insightfull I am at a loss to understand. It isn't even that funny.
heck, i knew that. god told me last week.
I mean who's paying for this law. I think we should be told. Unless it is transparent and can be called industry assistance, for some reasson people think corruption is a very bad thing and should be stopped.
Yes, that one.
poster wrote what a company did. I can't see any opinion expressed at all in the post, pure reportage. Is the poster an arsehole because they didn't rant how undemocratic it is that the company has that policy or just because they can string together more than six words.
ya think they'ds have an immunity or somrthing.
Oh, what religion are you then
It's just that I don't believe that cattle prods to the testicles are the usual response in the USA to complaints about political process or voting for the wrong candidate as is clearly the case in many other countries.
To use the term totalitarian police state in reference to the USA (and in fact all representative democracies)is a slap in the face to those who live in states that are more likely to be seen as such by any reasonable definition.
By your definition all countries are totalitarian police states at least which makes the term meaningless. It behoves you therefore to come up with a term that we can use for places that are even more awful than the awful USA now that you have neutered totalitarian police state.
your argument is just like saying 'don't worry, they don't keep you iris really, only a photo of it and it can't be converted back to an iris. They'd have to take your whole eye to comprimise your identity'
I'd have though it really simple to insert a template into an ident function and crack anything at all.
The only way i can see these things being unbreakable is if a team of humans check the iris face to face so no hacking of digital data and no second set of eyteballs. But even then you got potential problems with corrupt employees.
I thought that was the least fututristic bit of the whole movie but also thought that unless the machines could read your emotions there would be a shitload of broken retinal scanners around if not smoking holes where advertising agencies used to be.
Clearly though, the question is one of control. Who has or should have control of that information.
And this forum is host to many discussions about ownership or control of information which seeks to be free.
IANAL so I'll ask Can I copyright my retinal pattern so any non-consenting use is subject to action for recovery of gains made by the infringing party, ie if someone sells my retinal pattern I can get the money (plus damages).
Calling the US a totalatarian police state shows little understanding of just what the whole thing is about.
I don't live there and I'm not a big fan of all it does but maybe I have a clearer perspective of what it represents than some of the selfish little saddo "poor-me's" who actually live there.
The chances of getting hit by one that is big enough to have a significant effect are very small and I'm not sure the cost is worth it. Sure look for the really big ones which presumably easier to spot but looking for every one that might do some damage will be expensive.
Then again I'm not american and so it's not my money and they'de only really be looking for the ones that might hit usa.
As the saying goes 'If an asteroid falls in rawanda does anyone care'
yeah, you get it from killing your mother-in-law.
curse you for spoiling it for me.
she scares the shit outa me.