All your searches are for reference information and Wolfram is pretty good at this, for obvious stuff at least.
Instead of "countries in eu", try "baltic countries": Wolfram will give you detailed (and correct) information for "baltic states", but nothing for "baltic countries", Google Squared will give you pretty decent results for both (it misses one of the capitals for the "countries" search, it comes up as the second "guess" though).
That's the thing about W|A, you have to formulate your queries so specifically (and idiosyncratically) that you could've just as easily looked up the information in your reference source of choice, it doesn't really "search" anything.
I've yet to get back anything but a blank stare from Wolfram for anything that (a) I'm actually interested in and (b) I wouldn't immediately know how to look up. Their examples work great, though.
The Google thing, on the other hand, actually looks good for doing research: culling search results for structured information. You're not supposed to take the first thing that comes back as gospel.
Exercise for the reader: see which one will come up with a list of the Knight Sabers first.
Programming languages don't have attributes like size and speed
Well, not speed (that's why different compilers are profiled, btw), but certainly size: we're talking about code size here, not memory size (or binary size).
Is there any discipline where I can pick up a paper and immediately tell the quality of the work when I pick it up (or look it up somewhere without understanding the entire topic?
Well, no. You can't judge the the quality of something without understanding it. I'm not sure what you mean.
Almost anyone can commission a study, write a book etc. and it's left to the scientific community to place value on that work. Viewed on it's own, without knowledge of the scientific community's opinion it can be difficult to tell how valid the work is.
Well, yeah, if you are not qualified to judge the validity of a scientific work, you will not be able to judge it. What do you propose instead? That people not be allowed to publish studies and books?
In fact the entire publishing system is an antiquated remnant of the last 2 centuries and doesn't belong in an Internet connected world, yet publication is still the primary tool by which a scientist's work gets recognized.
You've answered your own question there: the value of the publishing system is no longer the dissemination of publications (ie anyone can just dump their research on the internet now) but the review process and the reputation those journals have built up. As imperfect as the peer review process is, I haven't really seen anyone propose anything better. This is novel research, no one can tell you with absolute certainty whether a paper is correct or worth publishing; the best you can do is let a couple of different people in the same field whack at it for a bit and see if it passes the smell test. Of course that means that some (in fact, quite a few) undeserving papers will be published, and deserving ones rejected, but again, what's the alternative?
Speaking of status, there is an emphasis on using scientific jargon to exclude the community at large.... However even simple concepts must be described in overly complex specialized language to be accepted for journal publication.
This is utterly bogus. I think it's one of those things that people just like repeating because it sounds like an easy win. Maybe it's different in other fields, but I have no problems reading biomedical literature, and I am not a trained scientist.
We should have a system that requires simplified language where possible and a layman's overview attached early in the document.
Why? Seriously, why? What on earth can the "layman" possibly contribute to the process, being - by definition - someone who doesn't understand the subject at hand? Remember, these are the people who think that "stem cells" are something you get by hacking up small children with knives and that the LHC will destroy the earth.
You think they will be a valuable "check" on the scientific community, if scientists are forced to use simpler words?
The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad.
I'm sorry, but none of that makes any sense. Manipulating the genomes of monkeys to produce specific traits is, by definition, genetic engineering. Most biological research is done with an eye for treating human disease (even if the research itself is quite far removed from the ultimate applications - they aren't just doing this to fuck with monkeys), so yes, getting this to work in humans is likely the ultimate goal.
And finally, "human genetic engineering is bad" is a nonsensical aphorism - why exactly is it bad?
And it opens files upwards of 40 MB (that's Megabyte)
Holy shit! Well, I certainly defer to the opinion of anyone working with 40MB source files - now that is programming.
Text editors make crappy IDEs, and IDEs make crappy text editors; there's just no need to have the same app do both, the overlap in functionality is not that great. Personally I prefer UltraEdit circa version 11.0, but whatever your preference, you need some dedicated text editor alongside your IDE.
Why wouldn't they do this? Or to put it another way, why would a user stick with last.fm after it sold out to a CBS?
That's not "putting in another way", it's two completely different points.
I use - and quite enjoy - last.fm, and I fully expected shit like this to start happening once they were taken over by CBS, and you know what? I couldn't care less.
If the RIAA is that curious to know how much Gogol Bordello I listen to, they are welcome to it (especially if that helps CBS keep the service free). The suggestion that someone could get sued over something like this is laughable.
So yeah, until a better (or equally good and Free) service comes along, I'm fine with last.fm
I just meant that at no point in the movie did he go "Welp, time to refill the old hydrogen tank!", so we don't actually know how this was supposed to work.
Though they did make it seems like his power cells were self-contained and didn't require fuel, making the whole "fuel cell" idea a little suspect.
So the only way to prevent that damn thing from starting every time you even look at any MS app is to be designated part of the "Axis of Evil"? Seems worth it.
Really? You don't see the difference between sacrificing short term fun to invest in your education, and dedicating your life to a pointless time-waster like an MMO?
Slashdot Mirror
All your searches are for reference information and Wolfram is pretty good at this, for obvious stuff at least.
Instead of "countries in eu", try "baltic countries": Wolfram will give you detailed (and correct) information for "baltic states", but nothing for "baltic countries", Google Squared will give you pretty decent results for both (it misses one of the capitals for the "countries" search, it comes up as the second "guess" though).
That's the thing about W|A, you have to formulate your queries so specifically (and idiosyncratically) that you could've just as easily looked up the information in your reference source of choice, it doesn't really "search" anything.
I've yet to get back anything but a blank stare from Wolfram for anything that (a) I'm actually interested in and (b) I wouldn't immediately know how to look up. Their examples work great, though.
The Google thing, on the other hand, actually looks good for doing research: culling search results for structured information. You're not supposed to take the first thing that comes back as gospel.
Exercise for the reader: see which one will come up with a list of the Knight Sabers first.
When this becomes a standard human input device...I don't want it.
Surely this is a human output device, at this point? Once it becomes a human input device, I think you will want it even less.
Not everyone can have a Facebook, only those who have an Internet.
The laser burst lasts only a few quadrillionths of a second.
Ah, thanks, I was wondering how long a femtosecond laser pulse lasts for.
Programming languages don't have attributes like size and speed
Well, not speed (that's why different compilers are profiled, btw), but certainly size: we're talking about code size here, not memory size (or binary size).
The person has chosen their addiction over everything else
Hmm, I think you've been misinformed about the meaning of at least one of those words.
You know, that's some pretty good spin, but I'm having trouble believing that the only problem here is that GTK is too awesome.
Is there any discipline where I can pick up a paper and immediately tell the quality of the work when I pick it up (or look it up somewhere without understanding the entire topic?
Well, no. You can't judge the the quality of something without understanding it. I'm not sure what you mean.
So, how many years of training do you need to work on a factory floor?
Almost anyone can commission a study, write a book etc. and it's left to the scientific community to place value on that work. Viewed on it's own, without knowledge of the scientific community's opinion it can be difficult to tell how valid the work is.
... However even simple concepts must be described in overly complex specialized language to be accepted for journal publication.
Well, yeah, if you are not qualified to judge the validity of a scientific work, you will not be able to judge it. What do you propose instead? That people not be allowed to publish studies and books?
In fact the entire publishing system is an antiquated remnant of the last 2 centuries and doesn't belong in an Internet connected world, yet publication is still the primary tool by which a scientist's work gets recognized.
You've answered your own question there: the value of the publishing system is no longer the dissemination of publications (ie anyone can just dump their research on the internet now) but the review process and the reputation those journals have built up. As imperfect as the peer review process is, I haven't really seen anyone propose anything better. This is novel research, no one can tell you with absolute certainty whether a paper is correct or worth publishing; the best you can do is let a couple of different people in the same field whack at it for a bit and see if it passes the smell test. Of course that means that some (in fact, quite a few) undeserving papers will be published, and deserving ones rejected, but again, what's the alternative?
Speaking of status, there is an emphasis on using scientific jargon to exclude the community at large.
This is utterly bogus. I think it's one of those things that people just like repeating because it sounds like an easy win. Maybe it's different in other fields, but I have no problems reading biomedical literature, and I am not a trained scientist.
We should have a system that requires simplified language where possible and a layman's overview attached early in the document.
Why? Seriously, why? What on earth can the "layman" possibly contribute to the process, being - by definition - someone who doesn't understand the subject at hand? Remember, these are the people who think that "stem cells" are something you get by hacking up small children with knives and that the LHC will destroy the earth.
You think they will be a valuable "check" on the scientific community, if scientists are forced to use simpler words?
In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed."
Shit, we do? I didn't even know there were "designed" people, and here I am, dehumanizing them!
The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad.
I'm sorry, but none of that makes any sense. Manipulating the genomes of monkeys to produce specific traits is, by definition, genetic engineering. Most biological research is done with an eye for treating human disease (even if the research itself is quite far removed from the ultimate applications - they aren't just doing this to fuck with monkeys), so yes, getting this to work in humans is likely the ultimate goal.
And finally, "human genetic engineering is bad" is a nonsensical aphorism - why exactly is it bad?
They're spending money on research, gimmicks just help pay for it.
There are many Watsons. Working in biotech I've seen dozens of machines and applications named Watson.
And it opens files upwards of 40 MB (that's Megabyte)
Holy shit! Well, I certainly defer to the opinion of anyone working with 40MB source files - now that is programming.
Text editors make crappy IDEs, and IDEs make crappy text editors; there's just no need to have the same app do both, the overlap in functionality is not that great. Personally I prefer UltraEdit circa version 11.0, but whatever your preference, you need some dedicated text editor alongside your IDE.
Even for a "business" user
I'm curious, do you just not believe that people travel for business?
Or is the whole concept just so preposterous that their needs should not be taken into account?
Why wouldn't they do this? Or to put it another way, why would a user stick with last.fm after it sold out to a CBS?
That's not "putting in another way", it's two completely different points.
I use - and quite enjoy - last.fm, and I fully expected shit like this to start happening once they were taken over by CBS, and you know what? I couldn't care less.
If the RIAA is that curious to know how much Gogol Bordello I listen to, they are welcome to it (especially if that helps CBS keep the service free). The suggestion that someone could get sued over something like this is laughable.
So yeah, until a better (or equally good and Free) service comes along, I'm fine with last.fm
I just meant that at no point in the movie did he go "Welp, time to refill the old hydrogen tank!", so we don't actually know how this was supposed to work.
Though they did make it seems like his power cells were self-contained and didn't require fuel, making the whole "fuel cell" idea a little suspect.
How long would a fuel cell from the future last before it needed a recharge?
Well, according to the movie, 120 years.
Not every single work of fiction is some deep allegory for some aspect of the human condition. Pong is not about the futility of existence.
You have an admirably liberal definition of "work of fiction".
And it is.
Hmm, "The Axis of Quit-it-with-Fucking-Messenger-Already" does have a certain ring to it...
The T-850 was apparently powered by two hydrogen fuel cells; no idea where he was supposed to be getting the hydrogen from, though.
Eh, seems no less plausible than the rest of it.
Is paranoia about non-state actors just in fashion right now?
Yes.
So the only way to prevent that damn thing from starting every time you even look at any MS app is to be designated part of the "Axis of Evil"? Seems worth it.
Really? You don't see the difference between sacrificing short term fun to invest in your education, and dedicating your life to a pointless time-waster like an MMO?