The 30% deflation makes for a very interesting excuse for playing Everquest. You are not playing Everquest, you are researching a hot investment. Out here on Earth, you would find it very hard to locate an investment opportunity that earned 30% a year. Apparently, Everquest paraphernalia does just that. Of course, you might have to do a lot of research so you can determine which are the best items to "invest" in.
Re:Big Bang, Black Holes, Quantum Computing, etc..
on
Black Holes Disputed
·
· Score: 1
I am not suggesting you take them on faith. I am suggesting that you use observations to determine the truth of the hypothesis. I am suggesting that people use a scientific method rather than talk about mindless waffle like this paper. I could write any old piece of junk about what is in the centre of a black hole. The important thing is for me to make predictions about observable effects such as rotation curves, etc..
Re:Big Bang, Black Holes, Quantum Computing, etc..
on
Black Holes Disputed
·
· Score: 1
I actually think this illustrates his point. As a society, the people who are viewed as most intelligent are the people who come up with theories. I think it is pretty easy to come up with new theories about how the universe works.
But, as you point out, the only thing that really matters is the testing of the theories and the reconciliation of those theories with the experimental results.
In other words, questions about black holes are equivalent to voodoo. We can never test hypotheses about them directly, we are just asked to believe they exist. Of course, that doesn't stop astronomers putting out press releases every year saying that they have found definitive evidence for black holes, but that just means they need new funding.
Every episode contains a piece of product placement. One episode they will go on about how great Mountain Dew is, and the next they will give away a Pontiac car.
For me, I think product placement is better than intrusive advertising. But you should never kid yourself that Survivor is anything but one long advert.
I think you raise a very complicated issue without even realising it. What I would ask you is how are you measuring the passage of time without using the speed of light as a fundamental input? Most physical methods of measuring time are ultimately defined using the speed of light as a measuring stick. That's at the heart of relativity.
I do agree that it would be a horrible situation for the companies to try and charge by the byte.
The obvious solution is to make the person that initiated the connection responsible for paying. Telco's already use this solution. I think one of the big advantages of this model is that it would really cut down on virii, spam, etc..
For example, if your computer was actually costing you money by hosting a virus and trying to send it out, then you would definitely find a way to stop passing on the infection.
If it cost real money to spam people, then someone would think twice before they spammed you. Currently, it costs them nothing to spam loads of people, with this model they would have to pay.
Yes, I guess my only point is that it's a lot harder than it first appears. For example, if I was to present an example of a reasonably intelligent British film that achieved broad appeal, I would talk about the Full Monty. I was very surprised that that particular film was so successful.
For example, the choice of location (Sheffield) is very important, but I don't expect an American to understand why Sheffield is significant (although maybe I am wrong but Sheffield is hardly on the tourist trail unless you are a huge fan of the Human League).
Maybe some of these misunderstandings would even cause an American to dismiss the Full Monty as just a mindless piece of fun.
Given time, I am sure I could also come up with examples of shows that many Americans think of as intelligent, while the British think of them as trite. I know that I used to dismiss all American sitcoms as useless, but it just turned out I didn't get 50% of the jokes.
Yes, but the curious thing is that Monty Python is considered quite passe in Britain. My father's generation still love it, but the rest of us moved on years ago.
If you really want to feel morally superior, you should point out that the US was on the verge of cancelling Baywatch (nobody here liked it or watched it), but all of the fans in Germany rescued the show.
People don't seem to realise that the shows that transfer abroad aren't likely to be the intelligent shows. Shows pitched at a higher level often require a lot of cultural information that just isn't applicable to, for example, Britain. Or, the more intelligent shows require a superior grasp of the language.
This is one of the reasons Hollywood is so smart. They know that it does not pay to make too complicated a plot, because, if they do, the film will not play well in Tokyo. I learnt this lesson the hard way. I came to the US from Britain. For some reason, PBS stations seem to think that Britain's "best" exports are "Keeping Up Appearances" and "Are You Being Served?". For me, that is deeply humiliating.
I am tired of ignorant Americans that seem to have no concept of the differences between Europe and the US.
In spite of the US chestbeating about State's rights and their pride in diversity, the States have far less differences between them than European COUNTRIES. For that matter, the States have far less autonomy.
Has this person never been outside of his own State (let alone the US)? Don't people like these posters realise that Britain, Spain, France, Germany and Italy speak different languages, have different national parliaments, constitutions and laws? I know California is about to adopt Spanish as its official language, but that is not quite the same.
Even within those countries, there is a strong local government. Germany is a federal republic. Britain has two parliaments beside Westminster - the Welsh assembly and the Scottish parliament.
I am going against the grain here, but I strongly disagree with the tax breaks on Internet sales.
I dislike sales taxes generally, because as you point out sales taxes are regressive taxes, hitting poorer consumers harder than wealthier consumers. The lack of an Internet sales tax further compounds the problem. Wealthier consumers who can afford to shop over the Internet get a tax break. Why do they need a tax break? For that matter, why do the Internet companies need what amounts to a subsidy to keep them in business?
The net effect of the sales tax break is for a lot of money to go into shipping companies' pockets. I want to subsidize UPS even less than I want to give money to the govt.
Hardware costs are also easy to estimate. Google have a cluster of 10,000 servers running Linux. The hardware cost alone should be 10,000*3000 USD . Since the other 300 people are configuring them, we don't need to consider total cost of ownership. This gives a total hardware cost of 30 Million USD. Assume that each of those computers has a lifetime of 3 years, then the total cost per day of the hardware is approx 27,000 USD per day. This converts to approx 0.02 c per query. This is still an insignificant number.
The figures I quoted were only estimates, but you are still way out when you get up to 0.3-0.6c per query.
Try thinking of it another way, at 120 million queries per day and 1c per query, Google would be spending 1.2 million USD per day to keep the site running. If they are spending that much, then maybe they should talk to me, because I can cut that number for them. Even with your ridiculously puffed-up figure of 0.3- 0.6c per day, they are spending 300-500K USD per day.
By the way, your quote from the VC shows why so many VC's are clueless. If they are paying that much for junior programmers, then they should relocate their office! This is the Internet age, after all.
This is a nice try, but it seems like your numbers are completely out. If you check this link http://www.google.com/press/facts.html, you will see Google is listed as having >250 employees. If you check this link here http://www.google.com/press/overview.html, you will see that Google responds to approx. 120 million queries per day.
If we assume 300 employees at cost 100,000 USD per year, this would work out to a cost of 0.06 cents per query. This is way below your estimated cost of 1c per query.
Obviously, this analysis ignores research costs. Unless they spent millions of person-years on this project I don't suppose it would make a significant difference.
I guess you shouldn't let the facts get in the way of a good argument!!
I am sick to death of conformists like you. I work in computers, I am good with computers, and I like to wear suits. Unfortunately, because I wear suits, I am branded as a dull-but-dependable worker and never allowed near the interesting projects. I am forever consigned to mid-level management. Maybe I should conform to the wayward genius image and start dressing like a slacker.....
Seriously, at any place I have ever worked, nobody wears a tie. In fact, I would think someone was pretty quirky if they wore a tie (unless that person was in retail).
Even in the Second World War there were regular propaganda radio broadcasts from Nazi Germany. The fact is the government will still succeed in covering up a lot of nasty issues because, even though they are not wholly credible, everybody else is even less credible.
Talking of getting a balanced view. Does anyone know where you can get English language translations of www.aljazeera.net? If such a site does not exist, then I hope someone who has the skills can set it up.
I would agree but for two things:
1. There is not enough differentiation in the grades any more. The grades are not being used to punish those who don't pay attention.
2. You are in a public area. You do not have the right to do anything you choose even though you have paid. Would you try and start up your laptop if you were in a cinema? Quite rightly, 99% of the cinema would be very angry with you if you did.
Slashdot Mirror
The 30% deflation makes for a very interesting excuse for playing Everquest. You are not playing Everquest, you are researching a hot investment. Out here on Earth, you would find it very hard to locate an investment opportunity that earned 30% a year. Apparently, Everquest paraphernalia does just that. Of course, you might have to do a lot of research so you can determine which are the best items to "invest" in.
I am not suggesting you take them on faith. I am suggesting that you use observations to determine the truth of the hypothesis. I am suggesting that people use a scientific method rather than talk about mindless waffle like this paper. I could write any old piece of junk about what is in the centre of a black hole. The important thing is for me to make predictions about observable effects such as rotation curves, etc..
I actually think this illustrates his point. As a society, the people who are viewed as most intelligent are the people who come up with theories. I think it is pretty easy to come up with new theories about how the universe works.
But, as you point out, the only thing that really matters is the testing of the theories and the reconciliation of those theories with the experimental results.
In other words, questions about black holes are equivalent to voodoo. We can never test hypotheses about them directly, we are just asked to believe they exist. Of course, that doesn't stop astronomers putting out press releases every year saying that they have found definitive evidence for black holes, but that just means they need new funding.
Try a Wisenut search for Ford. Its close to what you describe but seems to miss several categories of Ford.
Every episode contains a piece of product placement. One episode they will go on about how great Mountain Dew is, and the next they will give away a Pontiac car.
For me, I think product placement is better than intrusive advertising. But you should never kid yourself that Survivor is anything but one long advert.
If an article like this appears, someone somewhere is trying to get some funding.
I think you raise a very complicated issue without even realising it. What I would ask you is how are you measuring the passage of time without using the speed of light as a fundamental input? Most physical methods of measuring time are ultimately defined using the speed of light as a measuring stick. That's at the heart of relativity.
I do agree that it would be a horrible situation for the companies to try and charge by the byte.
The obvious solution is to make the person that initiated the connection responsible for paying. Telco's already use this solution. I think one of the big advantages of this model is that it would really cut down on virii, spam, etc..
For example, if your computer was actually costing you money by hosting a virus and trying to send it out, then you would definitely find a way to stop passing on the infection.
If it cost real money to spam people, then someone would think twice before they spammed you. Currently, it costs them nothing to spam loads of people, with this model they would have to pay.
Yes, I guess my only point is that it's a lot harder than it first appears. For example, if I was to present an example of a reasonably intelligent British film that achieved broad appeal, I would talk about the Full Monty. I was very surprised that that particular film was so successful.
For example, the choice of location (Sheffield) is very important, but I don't expect an American to understand why Sheffield is significant (although maybe I am wrong but Sheffield is hardly on the tourist trail unless you are a huge fan of the Human League).
Maybe some of these misunderstandings would even cause an American to dismiss the Full Monty as just a mindless piece of fun.
Given time, I am sure I could also come up with examples of shows that many Americans think of as intelligent, while the British think of them as trite. I know that I used to dismiss all American sitcoms as useless, but it just turned out I didn't get 50% of the jokes.
Yes, but the curious thing is that Monty Python is considered quite passe in Britain. My father's generation still love it, but the rest of us moved on years ago.
If you really want to feel morally superior, you should point out that the US was on the verge of cancelling Baywatch (nobody here liked it or watched it), but all of the fans in Germany rescued the show.
People don't seem to realise that the shows that transfer abroad aren't likely to be the intelligent shows. Shows pitched at a higher level often require a lot of cultural information that just isn't applicable to, for example, Britain. Or, the more intelligent shows require a superior grasp of the language.
This is one of the reasons Hollywood is so smart. They know that it does not pay to make too complicated a plot, because, if they do, the film will not play well in Tokyo. I learnt this lesson the hard way. I came to the US from Britain. For some reason, PBS stations seem to think that Britain's "best" exports are "Keeping Up Appearances" and "Are You Being Served?". For me, that is deeply humiliating.
I am tired of ignorant Americans that seem to have no concept of the differences between Europe and the US.
In spite of the US chestbeating about State's rights and their pride in diversity, the States have far less differences between them than European COUNTRIES. For that matter, the States have far less autonomy.
Has this person never been outside of his own State (let alone the US)? Don't people like these posters realise that Britain, Spain, France, Germany and Italy speak different languages, have different national parliaments, constitutions and laws? I know California is about to adopt Spanish as its official language, but that is not quite the same.
Even within those countries, there is a strong local government. Germany is a federal republic. Britain has two parliaments beside Westminster - the Welsh assembly and the Scottish parliament.
I am going against the grain here, but I strongly disagree with the tax breaks on Internet sales.
I dislike sales taxes generally, because as you point out sales taxes are regressive taxes, hitting poorer consumers harder than wealthier consumers. The lack of an Internet sales tax further compounds the problem. Wealthier consumers who can afford to shop over the Internet get a tax break. Why do they need a tax break? For that matter, why do the Internet companies need what amounts to a subsidy to keep them in business?
The net effect of the sales tax break is for a lot of money to go into shipping companies' pockets. I want to subsidize UPS even less than I want to give money to the govt.
Hardware costs are also easy to estimate. Google have a cluster of 10,000 servers running Linux. The hardware cost alone should be 10,000*3000 USD . Since the other 300 people are configuring them, we don't need to consider total cost of ownership. This gives a total hardware cost of 30 Million USD. Assume that each of those computers has a lifetime of 3 years, then the total cost per day of the hardware is approx 27,000 USD per day. This converts to approx 0.02 c per query. This is still an insignificant number.
The figures I quoted were only estimates, but you are still way out when you get up to 0.3-0.6c per query.
Try thinking of it another way, at 120 million queries per day and 1c per query, Google would be spending 1.2 million USD per day to keep the site running. If they are spending that much, then maybe they should talk to me, because I can cut that number for them. Even with your ridiculously puffed-up figure of 0.3- 0.6c per day, they are spending 300-500K USD per day.
By the way, your quote from the VC shows why so many VC's are clueless. If they are paying that much for junior programmers, then they should relocate their office! This is the Internet age, after all.
This is a nice try, but it seems like your numbers are completely out. If you check this link http://www.google.com/press/facts.html, you will see Google is listed as having >250 employees. If you check this link here http://www.google.com/press/overview.html, you will see that Google responds to approx. 120 million queries per day.
If we assume 300 employees at cost 100,000 USD per year, this would work out to a cost of 0.06 cents per query. This is way below your estimated cost of 1c per query.
Obviously, this analysis ignores research costs. Unless they spent millions of person-years on this project I don't suppose it would make a significant difference.
I guess you shouldn't let the facts get in the way of a good argument!!
I am sick to death of conformists like you. I work in computers, I am good with computers, and I like to wear suits. Unfortunately, because I wear suits, I am branded as a dull-but-dependable worker and never allowed near the interesting projects. I am forever consigned to mid-level management. Maybe I should conform to the wayward genius image and start dressing like a slacker.....
Seriously, at any place I have ever worked, nobody wears a tie. In fact, I would think someone was pretty quirky if they wore a tie (unless that person was in retail).
Even in the Second World War there were regular propaganda radio broadcasts from Nazi Germany. The fact is the government will still succeed in covering up a lot of nasty issues because, even though they are not wholly credible, everybody else is even less credible.
Talking of getting a balanced view. Does anyone know where you can get English language translations of www.aljazeera.net? If such a site does not exist, then I hope someone who has the skills can set it up.
I would agree but for two things:
1. There is not enough differentiation in the grades any more. The grades are not being used to punish those who don't pay attention.
2. You are in a public area. You do not have the right to do anything you choose even though you have paid. Would you try and start up your laptop if you were in a cinema? Quite rightly, 99% of the cinema would be very angry with you if you did.