Deer don't have a 'point of view.' They do not conceptualize. They can not think ahead and imagine what it would be like to be killed and eaten.
Don't be so sure. I saw this programme and am damn sure that the horse in question knew the kind of thing that was planned for her. That's why she escaped - jumped over a fence she had not jumped over all the rest of her life.
I'm not suggesting that animals philosophise in French in terrace cafes - but I find it hard to believe that they have don't have some kind of "world view" that is based around life experiences with a few "abstractions" to fill in the gaps.
Math is not reality.
Otherwise, we might be reading headlines like "Air France jet was out of 4s".
Math is always "correct"; that's why mathematical models of natural phonemona break down whan the numbers get extreme.
Now there are good jobs, the internet (censored) and pop culture, to occupy students. These werent really around in China 20 years ago.
It's not that surprising that the Chinese government is not in favour of youth movements - and in favour of pop culture, to the extent that they allow it.
Crude summary: The Cultural Revolution was a strategy implemented by Mao Zedong, with the help of his wife Jiang Qing to get his career back on track. The Red Guards were recruited from students (I wonder if he got the idea from news reports from the US?) and went around the place with a little red book of Mao quotes. Eventually, Mao had to send in the regular army to help disband the Red Guards. Then he implemented a forced dispersal of "intellectuals" (read "students") to rural areas for the following 10 years or so (to make it harder for them to congregate/communicate).
When you say "25 2GB J2EE app VMs", are you saying that each app got its own VM (no J2EE clustering)? Or was it a sort of virtual server farm with applications deployed across multiple virtual servers?
I'm trying to get a picture of how virtualisation gets used...
The models are useful, but in the end lots of business stuff just has to come down to gut feelings and judgement.
All human decisions - even the most abstract or "rational" - have an emotional component; this has been experimentally measured. It's easy to imagine that the emotional component a decision will carry more weight if the decision-maker has personal interest in it. We do not expect the people who are deciding the futures of our pensions (if we have jobs to qualify for said pensions) to possess Ninja-like reflexes; in fact, we would prefer them to be able to look beyond "spikes" and "bubbles". In other words, it's hard to imagine that decision-makers haven't had time to figure out what their "gut feelings" are telling them - maybe it just was something they didn't want to hear.
It is up to "decision-makers" to implement strategies that are in keeping with available evidence; a failure to do so is evidence of incompetence at best (alternatives being fear or greed). Blaming the model is a cop-out: delegating decision-making to a mathematical model is like delegating navation to your GPS.
Your prediction that people will try to "game" the next model alludes to something interesting: people were already "gaming" the old model ("system"/"culture") . The "scandal" goes all the way down as well as up. Everybody gotta eat.
What is the simplest calculation they should do?
Probably dev & support costs for their Linux distro versus Microsoft tax for Windows installs.
Companies are under great pressure to post returns that are as "not bad" as possible: PC vendors are probably less likely at the moment to invest in something that won't push the balance sheet in a positive direction for maybe a year.
Not to mention the fact that - since we are speaking of PC vendors in particular - increasing scrutiny on the insurance and finance they offer is going to force their profit margins down even further over the next couple of years...
If the code base is already cross-platform, then the idiosyncrasies of different Linux distributions are minor; making it run on Debian and Fedora is much easier than making it run on Windows and MacOS. A variety of fine cross platform toolkits and languages exist.
Are you suggesting Chrome should be written in Java?;-)
That scene was in "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe" (along with my favourite line, something like: "The lobby was almost empty but Ford nevertheless managed to weave his way through it").
I reckon MichaelSmith is referring to a movie that is almost - but not quite - completely unlike this book.
As long as there's an open (fixable) gc out there, we have nothing to stress about.
It's a win-win for Sun and their (few) paying clients: even if paid and free versions are identical, customer gets support contract.
It may be in Sun's (Oracle's) best interests to keep the versions identical (closed, customer-specific extensions excepted): the open version will try to solve its own problems, giving staff more time for contract work/research...
Sorry, no can do;-)
I tried Tree Style Tabs and it doesn't suit me.
Granted, I'm someone who either doesn't have a wide-screen monitor (home - it is pretty hi-res but high enough to display 16:9 without eye strain) or who uses the 9:16 trick (work - I flipped the screen on its side in order to facilitate scrolling through code).
Extra toolbars on the side aren't a great option for me. I was hoping that Tree Style Tabs would be a bit smart about the way it groups its tabs but unfortunately I ended up with fewer visible tabs with grouping: pretty pointless.
FYI I have been known to have 20-30 tabs open while I trawl the Internet for solutions to errors I'm trying to fix...
I stayed up late the night before a Physics exam. Towards 6am I was failing to remember the derivation of the Schrodinger Wave Equation. Gave up to catch some z's. Woke up 3 hours later with the whole thing running through my head. Only problem was I was late for exam;-)
Time-wise, it worked out ok: I only lost 15 mins. Ironically, in the exam I needed to know the formula for the Schrodinger Wave Equation, not its derivation. I didn't know that, so I had to derive it for 0% benefit (end product looked ok;-)
I'd never had that experience of knowing that my memory had benefited from sleep before. I reckon that I personally need a minimum of 3 hours for things to "stick". If I sleep less than 2, I think I lose stuff;-)
Musicians (and other "physical" people) will be familiar with the experience of performing some "problem" piece better after a sleep (or even a break).
The key is that Google is charging money for these names..
That doesn't matter if they aren't confusing consumers.
They're not selling the names to the customers. In fact, they are in effect selling the customers.
And if a Google search for a particular company turned up ads for the company's competitors but NOT and ad for the company in question (because that company did not have a Google ad deal), wouldn't that be a little misleading for end users?
I had to re-read a couple of times myself but I reckon the point is that a guy who was studying something really complicated was impressed to hear about someone studying oceanography.
BTW were you saying that naive people don't get it?
That must be it: "don't bring the customer into it". In a sense, they're only arguing about their cut of the customers' money. A cable company is a new kind of player but it's hard to argue against them: they are "distibutors", after all - and in a more literal sense than many of their companies whose content they are delivering. So why not let them do the job properly?
It is expensive, inefficent, non-eco-friendly and - by extension;-) - unpatriotic not to seek to minimise bandwidth. The Internet is not a pissing competition.
Even if refactored code doesn't arrange itself into a beautiful "model", it still is more manageable than code that is altered solely by local "patches".
It is not difficult to imagine that the same applies to laws (since code is expected to implement the "laws" of the programming language).
It is the responsibility of lawmakers to make laws manageable; unfortunately, most changes are "patches".
Slashdot Mirror
Deer don't have a 'point of view.' They do not conceptualize. They can not think ahead and imagine what it would be like to be killed and eaten.
Don't be so sure. I saw this programme and am damn sure that the horse in question knew the kind of thing that was planned for her. That's why she escaped - jumped over a fence she had not jumped over all the rest of her life.
I'm not suggesting that animals philosophise in French in terrace cafes - but I find it hard to believe that they have don't have some kind of "world view" that is based around life experiences with a few "abstractions" to fill in the gaps.
it would be a nice demonstration if they were to get it to work
One thing that would demonstrate is that the mathematics is valid. It's a bit like like trying to run a Java program on different JVMs ;-)
"Math is not reality." Not even if it's correct?
Math is not reality.
Otherwise, we might be reading headlines like "Air France jet was out of 4s".
Math is always "correct"; that's why mathematical models of natural phonemona break down whan the numbers get extreme.
Now there are good jobs, the internet (censored) and pop culture, to occupy students. These werent really around in China 20 years ago.
It's not that surprising that the Chinese government is not in favour of youth movements - and in favour of pop culture, to the extent that they allow it.
Crude summary: The Cultural Revolution was a strategy implemented by Mao Zedong, with the help of his wife Jiang Qing to get his career back on track. The Red Guards were recruited from students (I wonder if he got the idea from news reports from the US?) and went around the place with a little red book of Mao quotes. Eventually, Mao had to send in the regular army to help disband the Red Guards. Then he implemented a forced dispersal of "intellectuals" (read "students") to rural areas for the following 10 years or so (to make it harder for them to congregate/communicate).
When you say "25 2GB J2EE app VMs", are you saying that each app got its own VM (no J2EE clustering)? Or was it a sort of virtual server farm with applications deployed across multiple virtual servers?
I'm trying to get a picture of how virtualisation gets used...
The models are useful, but in the end lots of business stuff just has to come down to gut feelings and judgement.
All human decisions - even the most abstract or "rational" - have an emotional component; this has been experimentally measured. It's easy to imagine that the emotional component a decision will carry more weight if the decision-maker has personal interest in it. We do not expect the people who are deciding the futures of our pensions (if we have jobs to qualify for said pensions) to possess Ninja-like reflexes; in fact, we would prefer them to be able to look beyond "spikes" and "bubbles". In other words, it's hard to imagine that decision-makers haven't had time to figure out what their "gut feelings" are telling them - maybe it just was something they didn't want to hear.
It is up to "decision-makers" to implement strategies that are in keeping with available evidence; a failure to do so is evidence of incompetence at best (alternatives being fear or greed). Blaming the model is a cop-out: delegating decision-making to a mathematical model is like delegating navation to your GPS.
Your prediction that people will try to "game" the next model alludes to something interesting: people were already "gaming" the old model ("system"/"culture") . The "scandal" goes all the way down as well as up. Everybody gotta eat.
they don't see a benefit.
What is the simplest calculation they should do?
Probably dev & support costs for their Linux distro versus Microsoft tax for Windows installs.
Companies are under great pressure to post returns that are as "not bad" as possible: PC vendors are probably less likely at the moment to invest in something that won't push the balance sheet in a positive direction for maybe a year.
Not to mention the fact that - since we are speaking of PC vendors in particular - increasing scrutiny on the insurance and finance they offer is going to force their profit margins down even further over the next couple of years...
If the code base is already cross-platform, then the idiosyncrasies of different Linux distributions are minor; making it run on Debian and Fedora is much easier than making it run on Windows and MacOS. A variety of fine cross platform toolkits and languages exist.
Are you suggesting Chrome should be written in Java? ;-)
That scene was in "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe" (along with my favourite line, something like: "The lobby was almost empty but Ford nevertheless managed to weave his way through it").
I reckon MichaelSmith is referring to a movie that is almost - but not quite - completely unlike this book.
As long as there's an open (fixable) gc out there, we have nothing to stress about.
It's a win-win for Sun and their (few) paying clients: even if paid and free versions are identical, customer gets support contract.
It may be in Sun's (Oracle's) best interests to keep the versions identical (closed, customer-specific extensions excepted): the open version will try to solve its own problems, giving staff more time for contract work/research...
I liked it but didn't know how to say "that's funny" and keep it funny...
A lucky find hundreds of miles away called the rosetta stone is what allowed us to crack their encryptian.
Hieroglyphics ;-)
Examples:
Coincidence?
Sorry, no can do ;-)
I tried Tree Style Tabs and it doesn't suit me.
Granted, I'm someone who either doesn't have a wide-screen monitor (home - it is pretty hi-res but high enough to display 16:9 without eye strain) or who uses the 9:16 trick (work - I flipped the screen on its side in order to facilitate scrolling through code).
Extra toolbars on the side aren't a great option for me. I was hoping that Tree Style Tabs would be a bit smart about the way it groups its tabs but unfortunately I ended up with fewer visible tabs with grouping: pretty pointless.
FYI I have been known to have 20-30 tabs open while I trawl the Internet for solutions to errors I'm trying to fix...
I stayed up late the night before a Physics exam. Towards 6am I was failing to remember the derivation of the Schrodinger Wave Equation. Gave up to catch some z's. Woke up 3 hours later with the whole thing running through my head. Only problem was I was late for exam ;-)
;-)
;-)
Time-wise, it worked out ok: I only lost 15 mins. Ironically, in the exam I needed to know the formula for the Schrodinger Wave Equation, not its derivation. I didn't know that, so I had to derive it for 0% benefit (end product looked ok
I'd never had that experience of knowing that my memory had benefited from sleep before. I reckon that I personally need a minimum of 3 hours for things to "stick". If I sleep less than 2, I think I lose stuff
Musicians (and other "physical" people) will be familiar with the experience of performing some "problem" piece better after a sleep (or even a break).
The key is that Google is charging money for these names..
That doesn't matter if they aren't confusing consumers.
They're not selling the names to the customers. In fact, they are in effect selling the customers.
And if a Google search for a particular company turned up ads for the company's competitors but NOT and ad for the company in question (because that company did not have a Google ad deal), wouldn't that be a little misleading for end users?
Ok, another example might be: "Would you use a programming language that couldn't compile itself?"
Telsa gain!
Sequestering it in what? Photosynthesis can't happen without light.
I had to re-read a couple of times myself but I reckon the point is that a guy who was studying something really complicated was impressed to hear about someone studying oceanography.
BTW were you saying that naive people don't get it?
That must be it: "don't bring the customer into it". In a sense, they're only arguing about their cut of the customers' money. A cable company is a new kind of player but it's hard to argue against them: they are "distibutors", after all - and in a more literal sense than many of their companies whose content they are delivering. So why not let them do the job properly? ;-) - unpatriotic not to seek to minimise bandwidth. The Internet is not a pissing competition.
It is expensive, inefficent, non-eco-friendly and - by extension
Even if refactored code doesn't arrange itself into a beautiful "model", it still is more manageable than code that is altered solely by local "patches".
It is not difficult to imagine that the same applies to laws (since code is expected to implement the "laws" of the programming language).
It is the responsibility of lawmakers to make laws manageable; unfortunately, most changes are "patches".
I was expecting this. "One word, two syllables: demarcation"
+1 Tru Dat
Not "Offtopic".
Sarcastic.
A bit garish, tho...