"ctually, all Mac App providers don't have it easy since they usually have to release Carbon, Classic and Cocoa applications together."
WTF are you smoking?
If they release it in Carbon then it works on both MacOS X and MacOS 9. If they release it Cocoa it works on MacOS X. If they release it in Classic, then it only works in Classic.
My roommate's boyfriend at college (no, neither she nor he come to/.) was describing his QM book to me: evidently, in the first few chapters they try to explain things in terms of physical concepts that he could understand.
Then, about three chapters in, the book makes something explicit: From here on out, don't try to understand it, just trust the mathematics:-)
The problem with the "fear factor" is that it requires that the knowledge of concealed carry laws permeate the culture so that criminals are aware of them, however, statistics on the awareness of concealed carry laws seem to be so small as to not be worth considering for the purpose of his results.
This alone, not getting into some of the other things that have been brought up about his methodology, lends serious questions to his research and conclusions.
Awhile back I did an analysis of gun control by correlating one self-described "gun watchdog" group's grades (ranging from F to A, with +'s and -'s) on the different state's gun control laws.
Then I took the number of violent crimes, homicides, &c per capita (FBI statistics for the same year as the survey) and put them in separate columns. Looking at the correlation matrix I found that there was no correlation (R^2 <.25) between the level of gun-control.
A principle component analysis revealed a further lack of dependancy of one variable on the other.
This study was by no means complete--I didn't correlate it against the years or anything along those lines, but a search on the net for other research while I was performing the research for this project indicated that other studies--using various methodologies and some of them much more formal and complete than I had been--had come to the same conclusion that I had.
If you don't believe me, download a copy of R (http://www.r-project.org/) and check it yourself with those criteria you think would be accurate. I would be interested in the results.
If Harry Potter falls under that heading then so do Grimm's Fairy Tales, Anderson's Fairy Tales, the Tales of a Thousand Nights and One Night, and a fair chunk of the Bible (both testaments).
But then, I don't exactly expect to convince your kind using logic.
I'm just way too tired to think coherently enough to rationalize out why I shouldn't be telling you this.
The Faculty Advisor for our Mac Users Group on campus actually knew the DJ they had up in their last batch of switch ads. He hadn't seen her since 1989 and was mildly shocked when she appeared on the television in a commercial.
"The traditional XOR - OTP is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle active change attack."
Just as a brief note, this problem falls out when you add in a secure, one-way-hash to the plaintext before encryption with the OTP.
This demonstrates that you are correct on both counts: simple OTPs do have a known plaintext attack against them and that the basic OTP can be improved upon.
>That's how I feel about "irreducible complexity". >It will be found to be reducible.
Um, CA Rule 90 is irreducible.
As are the AS and AL simulations I have run: at any given point t0+1 I cannot extrapolate out the system state t0.
The "Theory of Gaps" doesn't work, but saying that we will one day find it to be reducible is a function of faith, not good science. As is saying that things that don't fit now will be filled in at some point in the indeterminate future.
5) What kind of "software and hardware" performance?
6) If I use Photoshop every day, Photoshop matters more to me than any other benchmark. 6a) More users have photoshop on desktop machines than have XServes.
7) RAM Configuration of the two systems. Were varying RAM Configurations attempted?
8) Hard Drives.
&c &c
Benchmarking across two platforms is *incredibly* difficult.
I fail to see the relevance of the courier in this case.
So a taxi company will take someone to the door of a place that is illegal for them to go to (say an underage brothel). What is the proper course of action?
a) Prevent taxi companies from taking people into those neighborhoods.
b) Do your best to close down the underage brothel and arrest the proprietors.
Failing b, (a) is not an acceptable substitute. It places the responsibility into the hands of people who it should not be the responsibility of, it interferes with the flow of business, and it is so easily circumvented by customers that it almost isn't worth considering.
Chill. There are better ways to handle this than to shoot the messengers. Knee-jerk reactions that sum to "THIS IS WRONG WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO STOP ANYONE FROM EVER LOOKING AT IT" don't help the matter and are what lead to the corrosion of our rights.
Of course, if you want to go for the full out, $120 version ($80 for me:-), I think you will find it worth it if you do any serious editing. Personally, I love this text editor dearly.
"...because flight crews do not have the knowledge to differentiate between standard notebooks and ones with UWB devices."
Two Replies: "Knowledge is Power"
"Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups"
Seriously, did anyone else get the impression from this that we are going to be flying nude without carry-on bags of any sort in the near future?
Considering how rare (nonexistent in the consumer market, according tot he article) these things are presently, why is this considered a problem that deserves such reactionary treatment as banning *all* laptops and PDAs? (Nevermind that if we want to treat this as a security risk there go calculators, game boys, and anything else that could conceal one of these things).
More reactionary nonsense in the name of "security": I'm waiting for someone to attempt to hijack an airplane with their shoelaces (a garrote) and see how quickly it takes legislators to attempt to ban shoes.
Also bear in mind that said person samples by downloading an mp3, and purchases something that he would not choose to purchase otherwise.
Since mp3s hit the scenes, my CD purchases have gone *up*. This is not a unique situation: most of my friends are in the same boat, as well as several studies I have seen on this effect.
When we think about how this may or may not affect the music industry negatively, don't forget the positive effects as well as the negative.
"Wrong. The probabilities of those three exact sequences are identical. 1"
Only if you consider that *exact sequence* the only possible success. Which is not what the original author meant. The author was also not comparing coin flips to genetic code--he was using it as a reference on probability and, as such, HHHTTT and HTHTHT are identical probabilities, HHHHHH is not the same.
Why? Because we are not considering the single pattern the success, we are considering the count of heads the number of successes.
Slashdot Mirror
...that someone read the article.
"ctually, all Mac App providers don't have it easy since they usually have to release Carbon, Classic and Cocoa applications together."
WTF are you smoking?
If they release it in Carbon then it works on both MacOS X and MacOS 9. If they release it Cocoa it works on MacOS X. If they release it in Classic, then it only works in Classic.
Why on earth would they need to sync all three?
It is listed as a:
PowerPC 750CXe v3.1 (tech 3)
My roommate's boyfriend at college (no, neither she nor he come to /.) was describing his QM book to me: evidently, in the first few chapters they try to explain things in terms of physical concepts that he could understand.
:-)
Then, about three chapters in, the book makes something explicit: From here on out, don't try to understand it, just trust the mathematics
The problem with the "fear factor" is that it requires that the knowledge of concealed carry laws permeate the culture so that criminals are aware of them, however, statistics on the awareness of concealed carry laws seem to be so small as to not be worth considering for the purpose of his results.
This alone, not getting into some of the other things that have been brought up about his methodology, lends serious questions to his research and conclusions.
Awhile back I did an analysis of gun control by correlating one self-described "gun watchdog" group's grades (ranging from F to A, with +'s and -'s) on the different state's gun control laws.
.25) between the level of gun-control.
Then I took the number of violent crimes, homicides, &c per capita (FBI statistics for the same year as the survey) and put them in separate columns. Looking at the correlation matrix I found that there was no correlation (R^2 <
A principle component analysis revealed a further lack of dependancy of one variable on the other.
This study was by no means complete--I didn't correlate it against the years or anything along those lines, but a search on the net for other research while I was performing the research for this project indicated that other studies--using various methodologies and some of them much more formal and complete than I had been--had come to the same conclusion that I had.
If you don't believe me, download a copy of R (http://www.r-project.org/) and check it yourself with those criteria you think would be accurate. I would be interested in the results.
>Dude, I used my last mod point on you, and I'm a
;-)
>Mac user.
Not the brightest Mac user in the bunch, last I checked you loose your mod points in a thread after posting in it
Windows Media Player *does* watch you, at least last I heard...
/ 01 32232&mode=thread&tid=109
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/03/29
Where on EARTH do you get this?
I am running it RIGHT NOW on a system that has 8 MB of VRAM.
Get your facts straight before you troll.
If Harry Potter falls under that heading then so do Grimm's Fairy Tales, Anderson's Fairy Tales, the Tales of a Thousand Nights and One Night, and a fair chunk of the Bible (both testaments).
But then, I don't exactly expect to convince your kind using logic.
I'm just way too tired to think coherently enough to rationalize out why I shouldn't be telling you this.
You cared much for Dune, if you thought HP has Messiah-like qualities...
<p>Beyond that the story has several classical elements and Rowling is a *big* fan of <i>Deus ex Machina</i>.</p>
Hmmmmmm, if you have problems with them naming a Lion "Lion" then you can fault their source material as well.
Lets not even get into Kipling's work as well, or a variety of other stories.
Speaking from experience there, eh? ;-)
On my single processor 600MHz G3 iBook.
Second Hand, but its something.
The Faculty Advisor for our Mac Users Group on campus actually knew the DJ they had up in their last batch of switch ads. He hadn't seen her since 1989 and was mildly shocked when she appeared on the television in a commercial.
"The traditional XOR - OTP is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle active change attack."
Just as a brief note, this problem falls out when you add in a secure, one-way-hash to the plaintext before encryption with the OTP.
This demonstrates that you are correct on both counts: simple OTPs do have a known plaintext attack against them and that the basic OTP can be improved upon.
>That's how I feel about "irreducible complexity". >It will be found to be reducible.
Um, CA Rule 90 is irreducible.
As are the AS and AL simulations I have run: at any given point t0+1 I cannot extrapolate out the system state t0.
The "Theory of Gaps" doesn't work, but saying that we will one day find it to be reducible is a function of faith, not good science. As is saying that things that don't fit now will be filled in at some point in the indeterminate future.
1) Benchmarking is Difficult.
2) Which version of OS X were they using?
3) What version of RedHat did they have running?
4) Who's software were they running on what?
5) What kind of "software and hardware" performance?
6) If I use Photoshop every day, Photoshop matters more to me than any other benchmark.
6a) More users have photoshop on desktop machines than have XServes.
7) RAM Configuration of the two systems. Were varying RAM Configurations attempted?
8) Hard Drives.
&c &c
Benchmarking across two platforms is *incredibly* difficult.
I fail to see the relevance of the courier in this case.
So a taxi company will take someone to the door of a place that is illegal for them to go to (say an underage brothel). What is the proper course of action?
a) Prevent taxi companies from taking people into those neighborhoods.
b) Do your best to close down the underage brothel and arrest the proprietors.
Failing b, (a) is not an acceptable substitute. It places the responsibility into the hands of people who it should not be the responsibility of, it interferes with the flow of business, and it is so easily circumvented by customers that it almost isn't worth considering.
Chill. There are better ways to handle this than to shoot the messengers. Knee-jerk reactions that sum to "THIS IS WRONG WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO STOP ANYONE FROM EVER LOOKING AT IT" don't help the matter and are what lead to the corrosion of our rights.
http://barebones.com/products.html
:-), I think you will find it worth it if you do any serious editing. Personally, I love this text editor dearly.
BBEdit Lite, I think you will be quite pleased.
Of course, if you want to go for the full out, $120 version ($80 for me
Your other option, of course, is xemacs.
"...because flight crews do not have the knowledge to differentiate between standard notebooks and ones with UWB devices."
Two Replies:
"Knowledge is Power"
"Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups"
Seriously, did anyone else get the impression from this that we are going to be flying nude without carry-on bags of any sort in the near future?
Considering how rare (nonexistent in the consumer market, according tot he article) these things are presently, why is this considered a problem that deserves such reactionary treatment as banning *all* laptops and PDAs? (Nevermind that if we want to treat this as a security risk there go calculators, game boys, and anything else that could conceal one of these things).
More reactionary nonsense in the name of "security": I'm waiting for someone to attempt to hijack an airplane with their shoelaces (a garrote) and see how quickly it takes legislators to attempt to ban shoes.
Actually it looks like Einstein was a model Deist. Look up the word, it describes him perfectly.
Also bear in mind that said person samples by downloading an mp3, and purchases something that he would not choose to purchase otherwise.
Since mp3s hit the scenes, my CD purchases have gone *up*. This is not a unique situation: most of my friends are in the same boat, as well as several studies I have seen on this effect.
When we think about how this may or may not affect the music industry negatively, don't forget the positive effects as well as the negative.
"It's you who doesn't understand probability."
Funny, I tutor the subject and have made a living working with it before.
"Every particular sequence of coins in a coin toss is as likely as any other, including all heads or all tails. "
Except the count of heads and tails is *not* as likely. Others have covered this.
"A royal flush is no less likely a poker hand than any other."
But a *straight* is much more likely than a *straight flush* is much more likely than a &royal flush*.
You are misrepresenting the point.
Ah, I see the misunderstanding now.
"Wrong. The probabilities of those three exact sequences are identical. 1"
Only if you consider that *exact sequence* the only possible success. Which is not what the original author meant. The author was also not comparing coin flips to genetic code--he was using it as a reference on probability and, as such, HHHTTT and HTHTHT are identical probabilities, HHHHHH is not the same.
Why? Because we are not considering the single pattern the success, we are considering the count of heads the number of successes.