1) Are scientists constantly surprised by what they discover? 2) Why?
Answer to #1 is "NO!" Constantly? Really? What do *YOU* think 'constant' means? Answer to #2 is "Because careful research, or even a cursory pair of Google queries, demonstrates that 'conventional wisdom', the basis for much theoretical research, is confirmed far more often than it is overturned.
Google reports: "scientists were surprised" 76,300 results "research confirmed" 965,000 results better than 12:1 ratio the other way: not my idea of "constantly"
I, on the other hand, *AM* "constantly surprised" at the absence of critical thinking skills frequently displayed by otherwise allegedly sensible individuals.
Well, not "constantly". More like intermittently, but frequently.
Shhhhhhhhh: don't tell them that our 3rd rock has been secretly colonized by denizens from the 2nd rock, who have already begun terraforming...errrr...venusforming(?) it, and have made tremendous progress in that direction in just a bit less than a single century, local time...
"adults chosen, who ranged from 18 to 45 years old, reported little to no video game play in the previous six months and were screened for pre-existing psychological problems before the tests."
So, only three (3) out of ninety (90) NON-GAMERS who were mentally strip-searched before entry had violent tendencies after playing games?
No Shirt, Hemlock! (bowdlerized for your viewing comfort/sanitized for your protection)
Better still, even after being "subjected to a wide battery of 52 established questionnaires intended to measure {long list of normal human tendencies}"... "immediately before and immediately after the two-month gameplay period and also two months afterward", only three test subjects retained enough sentience to react adversely. The remainder were presumably battered into submission by the 52 questionnaire batteries administered repeatedly over more than half a year.
Better, or worse: a sock full of batteries applied repeatedly to the back of their skulls?
Nine specific activities are exempted from mandatory overtime pay for each of the following three items:
1) meat 2) fish products and 3) perishable foods
The nine (9) activities are: 1) canning 2) processing 3) preserving 4) freezing 5) drying 6) marketing 7) storing 8) packing for shipment and 9) distribution
So, at my usual legal fee billing rate of $360.00 per hour, somebody owes me $30.00 (cash only: no checks, money orders, EFT drafts, or wire transfers)
And the hits just keep on coming from our A-list blisters The team that brought us Flash, to inspire full employment for browser designers, to keep them busy writing disability check boxes. Oh, so NOW it's going away? After all the breaches, hacks, and violations? Took their sweet time owning up to the horridity. Still, better Nate than Clever.
1) Women & Men are inherently equally endowed with all the important skills, traits, abilities, and preferences that contribute to successful careers in Engineering, hard or soft. Therefore, all selections for employment (hiring/firing), promotion, compensation, etc. should be, indeed MUST be gender-blind. Selections shall be made on technical merit alone, without regard to gender (or other innate native identifying characteristics, e.g.: height, weight, hair color, blood type, skin pigmentation, etc.) Affirmative action that favors any group based on non-technical qualities for the purpose of meeting "diversity" goals is wrong and discriminatory.
2) Women have been historically disfavored, and the prevalent social and cultural context has programmed them to avoid STEM career paths in favor of historically more "traditional" choices. Conventional academic environments reinforce gender stereotypes, and raise barriers to entry for women disproportionately higher than for men. In order to compensate for historical imbalances that have distorted free market forces, extra incentives, encouragement and support for women is only fair, and should be universally available. Equal opportunity employment is only possible if the candidates for employment have had equal preparation for the demands they will be expected to satisfy. As has been famously stated, "separate is inherently unequal".
3) Women have a unique role, superior to men, due to their reproductive capacity to conceive, nurture, and give birth to future generations. Only women carry the burden of pregnancy, and their safety, health, and well-being is more important than that of men who, after the instant of impregnation passes, are free to wander off and live unencumbered lives. This does, and must, confer on them a special protected status in society. The primary function of men is, and should be, the protection of women and the provenance of food, clothing, shelter, and whatever other necessities are required to allow women to perform their primary mission: propagation of the species. Some women self-select technical career paths, either instead of or in addition to taking on the substantial and demanding responsibilities of child-rearing, with all that entails. In recognition of those stalwart individuals who choose to make greater positive contributions to society than would normally be expected, extra compensation is appropriate and should be required. Two jobs, two paychecks is a fair standard.
4) Status quo: this is a tempest in a teapot, much ado about nothing...a gigantic, and apparently successful, troll of the G-Plex and all its inhabitants, PC or not.
5) The infamous "else" case: "D: None Of The Above"
But then, I only fry firmware-burgers, so 'C' and assembler are it...unless you wanna count all the assembler flavors, then it would be 2 or 3 times a day...
"Isotropic gain", eh? Directionality-dependent: what's gonna make the charger track your phone/chargee so the beam is pointing where it's located? Will there be a single axis of location where the directional gain is effective? How far off-axis does the chargee have to be for this looney-tunes scheme to fail? etc.
Inverse-square over distance still applies to directional charging sound "beams". Will they supply a portable fence to protect your pets from walking into the beam path? Ya know how gallstones are vibrated into shards these days, right? Sounds (PTP) like just more 'shake' oil. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
I question whether the 'origin' of the attack can be designated in most cases.
An unattended, unsecured box in a corporate cubicle, zombied by a back-door trojan isn't the 'origin'. Neither is the mom-and-pop AOL box in the basement.
It's the hacker(s) who control the zombie masses that are the origin, out in that nebulous cloud.
If the attacks could really be traced to their true origins, as in 'first cause', and that inital controlling element is physically present within our borders, would not the zombie nets have been rendered ineffective long since?
Why didn't the just come out an say that the device uses "high-speed all-optical signal processing in compact, low-loss optical devices through the use of four-wave mixing (FWM) and cross-phase modulation (XPM) via the ultra fast Kerr effect??"
As ~2% of the posters wisely noted, the two major skill set classes are neither mutually exclusive, nor sufficient.
"Both" is a partially correct answer, but "Both and then some" is a more nearly sufficient approximation.
Emotional Intelligence, common sense, a firm grasp of the underlying economic realities, the ability to finely parse a marginal ethical dilemma into multiple shades of grey, the ability to communicate complex concepts with clarity to non-technical audiences, and many, many more aptitudes and attitudes are all relevant and contribute to the production of seasoned engineers, in any specialty. The existing academic establishment struggles with subject areas not math- or science-based. Rigor is not the exclusive province of the physical sciences, math, and engineering ( e.g.: cognitive neuro-linguistics ), but there are relatively few exceptional scholars in the liberal arts or social 'sciences'.
An irrepressible sense of humor wouldn't hoit, either.
Technical Comedy 483: "Ratbert as Doppelganger" MWF 0800-0815 3 cr.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Are scientists constantly surprised by what they discover?
2) Why?
Answer to #1 is "NO!" Constantly? Really? What do *YOU* think 'constant' means?
Answer to #2 is "Because careful research, or even a cursory pair of Google queries, demonstrates that 'conventional wisdom', the basis for much theoretical research, is confirmed far more often than it is overturned.
Google reports:
"scientists were surprised" 76,300 results
"research confirmed" 965,000 results
better than 12:1 ratio the other way: not my idea of "constantly"
I, on the other hand, *AM* "constantly surprised" at the absence of critical thinking skills frequently displayed by otherwise allegedly sensible individuals.
Well, not "constantly". More like intermittently, but frequently.
Shhhhhhhhh: don't tell them that our 3rd rock has been secretly colonized by denizens from the 2nd rock, who have already begun terraforming...errrr...venusforming(?) it, and have made tremendous progress in that direction in just a bit less than a single century, local time...
So, if one individual fails to rebut his points on the merits, then it necessarily must follow that no rebuttal is possible?
Really?
Wow.
Just wow.
1) Speak inconvenient truth to power
2) Get stomped on because (1)
3) $$$ (?)
...Fulfillment Centers up beat *YOU* until you are fully filled up!
Too many people read the acronym as Blue Screen of Death...
"adults chosen, who ranged from 18 to 45 years old, reported little to no video game play in the previous six months and were screened for pre-existing psychological problems before the tests."
So, only three (3) out of ninety (90) NON-GAMERS who were mentally strip-searched before entry had violent tendencies after playing games?
No Shirt, Hemlock!
(bowdlerized for your viewing comfort/sanitized for your protection)
Better still, even after being "subjected to a wide battery of 52 established questionnaires intended to measure {long list of normal human tendencies}"...
"immediately before and immediately after the two-month gameplay period and also two months afterward", only three test subjects retained enough sentience to react adversely. The remainder were presumably battered into submission by the 52 questionnaire batteries administered repeatedly over more than half a year.
Better, or worse: a sock full of batteries applied repeatedly to the back of their skulls?
Speaking of back, I want my grant money back!
(=4)
prounounced: "(less than or equal to 4) is NOT equal to (greater than or equal to 4)"
"only a four-year college degree or less" defines a class of respondents with = 4 years of (allegedly higher) education
e.g.: Associates Degree = 4ycd or less (yes, less)
PhD = 4ycd or more (yes, more)
yes, the groups intersect (overlap) for those with precisely 4.0 years (not 3.999, and not 4.001)
It took less than five minutes to type this.
Nine specific activities are exempted from mandatory overtime pay for each of the following three items:
1) meat
2) fish products
and
3) perishable foods
The nine (9) activities are:
1) canning
2) processing
3) preserving
4) freezing
5) drying
6) marketing
7) storing
8) packing for shipment
and
9) distribution
So, at my usual legal fee billing rate of $360.00 per hour, somebody owes me $30.00 (cash only: no checks, money orders, EFT drafts, or wire transfers)
And the hits just keep on coming from our A-list blisters
The team that brought us Flash, to inspire full employment for browser designers, to keep them busy writing disability check boxes.
Oh, so NOW it's going away? After all the breaches, hacks, and violations?
Took their sweet time owning up to the horridity.
Still, better Nate than Clever.
So, "fast, good, cheap: pick any two" has been replaced by "smart, fair, profitable: pick any *ONE*" ?
Really?
1) Women & Men are inherently equally endowed with all the important skills, traits, abilities, and preferences that contribute to successful careers in Engineering, hard or soft. Therefore, all selections for employment (hiring/firing), promotion, compensation, etc. should be, indeed MUST be gender-blind. Selections shall be made on technical merit alone, without regard to gender (or other innate native identifying characteristics, e.g.: height, weight, hair color, blood type, skin pigmentation, etc.) Affirmative action that favors any group based on non-technical qualities for the purpose of meeting "diversity" goals is wrong and discriminatory.
2) Women have been historically disfavored, and the prevalent social and cultural context has programmed them to avoid STEM career paths in favor of historically more "traditional" choices.
Conventional academic environments reinforce gender stereotypes, and raise barriers to entry for women disproportionately higher than for men. In order to compensate for historical imbalances that have distorted free market forces, extra incentives, encouragement and support for women is only fair, and should be universally available. Equal opportunity employment is only possible if the candidates for employment have had equal preparation for the demands they will be expected to satisfy. As has been famously stated, "separate is inherently unequal".
3) Women have a unique role, superior to men, due to their reproductive capacity to conceive, nurture, and give birth to future generations. Only women carry the burden of pregnancy, and their safety, health, and well-being is more important than that of men who, after the instant of impregnation passes, are free to wander off and live unencumbered lives. This does, and must, confer on them a special protected status in society. The primary function of men is, and should be, the protection of women and the provenance of food, clothing, shelter, and whatever other necessities are required to allow women to perform their primary mission: propagation of the species. Some women self-select technical career paths, either instead of or in addition to taking on the substantial and demanding responsibilities of child-rearing, with all that entails.
In recognition of those stalwart individuals who choose to make greater positive contributions to society than would normally be expected, extra compensation is appropriate and should be required. Two jobs, two paychecks is a fair standard.
4) Status quo: this is a tempest in a teapot, much ado about nothing...a gigantic, and apparently successful, troll of the G-Plex and all its inhabitants, PC or not.
5) The infamous "else" case: "D: None Of The Above"
ya pays yer money and ya takes yer choice...
Yes!
The more bugs in the original release, the merrier!
Really?
But then, I only fry firmware-burgers, so 'C' and assembler are it...unless you wanna count all the assembler flavors, then it would be 2 or 3 times a day...
"Isotropic gain", eh? Directionality-dependent: what's gonna make the charger track your phone/chargee so the beam is pointing where it's located?
Will there be a single axis of location where the directional gain is effective?
How far off-axis does the chargee have to be for this looney-tunes scheme to fail?
etc.
Inverse-square over distance still applies to directional charging sound "beams".
Will they supply a portable fence to protect your pets from walking into the beam path?
Ya know how gallstones are vibrated into shards these days, right?
Sounds (PTP) like just more 'shake' oil. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
FTFY
You're welcome.
...and I'm not talking ballet or opera, either...well, maybe Opera...while it was still in development....
19,500 CDs at
208 larger items at $548.79 ea: $114148.32
One frayed USB cable: $1.68
Self-rebating your IRS overcharges: priceless
I question whether the 'origin' of the attack can be designated in most cases.
An unattended, unsecured box in a corporate cubicle, zombied by a back-door trojan isn't the 'origin'.
Neither is the mom-and-pop AOL box in the basement.
It's the hacker(s) who control the zombie masses that are the origin, out in that nebulous cloud.
If the attacks could really be traced to their true origins, as in 'first cause', and that inital controlling element is physically present within our borders, would not the zombie nets have been rendered ineffective long since?
just askin'
...are belong to us?
http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/hs/intro-courses/computers/index.htm
Why didn't the just come out an say that the device uses "high-speed all-optical signal processing in compact, low-loss optical devices through the use of four-wave mixing (FWM) and cross-phase modulation (XPM) via the ultra fast Kerr effect??"
"'Moving emphasis away from programming proficiency was a key to the success "
"wtf!?! you don't ageee with more chicks in CS?!?!? Don't ruin this for us!!!! We're SO lonely!!!"
( de-toupperfied to avoid lameness filter )
sister, puleeeze!!
theory XOR practice?
As ~2% of the posters wisely noted, the two major skill set classes are neither mutually exclusive, nor sufficient.
"Both" is a partially correct answer, but "Both and then some" is a more nearly sufficient approximation.
Emotional Intelligence, common sense, a firm grasp of the underlying economic realities, the ability to finely parse a marginal ethical dilemma into multiple shades of grey, the ability to communicate complex concepts with clarity to non-technical audiences, and many, many more aptitudes and attitudes are all relevant and contribute to the production of seasoned engineers, in any specialty. The existing academic establishment struggles with subject areas not math- or science-based. Rigor is not the exclusive province of the physical sciences, math, and engineering ( e.g.: cognitive neuro-linguistics ), but there are relatively few exceptional scholars in the liberal arts or social 'sciences'.
An irrepressible sense of humor wouldn't hoit, either.
Technical Comedy 483: "Ratbert as Doppelganger" MWF 0800-0815 3 cr.
...with my favorite radio station: WII-FM