If it's that much of a concern, why don't the schools have a set of TI calculators that are available for standardized tests?
My school did that. It turned out it was way too expensive. TI calculators are designed to fail exactly 24 hours after their warranty expires. Better they go with Casio, or HP (assuming HP still makes calculators).
In the US, it doesn't, the Supreme Court made that clear. Yes, trackers are legal in the United States. In Canada, it's their laws or their judges that are being inconsistent in the case of trackers.
The original press release doesn't describe it as a "breakthrough". My guess is, that someone at treehugger.com determined that ad-revenue was their single greatest point of failure. So my guess is that this is a breakthrough but only for people with a very specific business model.
1) Teach them to take their own pulse, and they can learn a valuable skill to be used anytime
or
2) Use Heart Rate Monitors [...] that are only useful when they are present and work
Obligatory car analogy follows:
You can teach a new driver how to calculate his own speed and his own RPMs, but that information is not going to be as useful to him as if it was presented to him in real-time.
And in answer to your #2: No, that's the entire point of learning new habits. You need the most feedback when you're learning (when you're making corrections). Once you've successfully learned a new habit, you don't need all that extra feedback.
I think the trouble is that you've never had your own HRM. The HRMs that you find on machines at the typical gym are lousy.
These are middle school kids we are talking about though. I mean serious the PE instructor should be about to give 11-14 year olds a lecture about, if you feel faint, like your heart is racing, etc, etc. You need to stop and come see me.
PE is also about knowing when you should continue to push, to hit that next performance gain. I used to wear a hear-monitor when I went out running. I don't need to wear one anymore. I've learned to estimate my heart-rate pretty accurately because of it.
This should give the kids the same kind of self-awareness, that they'll be able to bring into adulthood. I guess you could teach kids to take their own pulse, as most schools already do, but I don't personally think this has the same motivational effect.
And as to the cost, the summary talked about the parents having to buy the strap for their kids, not the actual device. The school probably only has one or two devices anyway. It's not that you need to monitor every kid all the time. It's more of a teaching tool. And if the straps are the ones that you put around your chest, it's probably a good idea that the parents buy their own. Those get dirty with sweat easily, and they tend to break the more you use them (while the device(s) itself should be fine -- it should be able to service thousands of students for many years without breaking).
For example, Wifi in Starbucks requires a monthly fee from AT&T (or T-Mobile, can't remember).
Starbucks gives you two hours of free wifi per day (all you have to do is make a small purchase from them using one of their prepaid gift cards once every thirty days, the purchase can be anything, a small cup of coffee, a small candy, or whatever).
The only drawback is that it takes anywhere from 24 hours to 48 hours to get your initial access working after you've completed your initial online registration.
I don't follow. What collaboration? Do you mean a collaboration between the FSF and TomTom? What do they "want to keep dark"? Can you clarify your post please, preferably without the extraneous commentary.
You're analogy compared them to making drugs illegal wherein all users of drugs are criminals; hence by comparison in your analogy, all users of computers are criminals. As I said, bad analogy. Use your brain.
No, drug users are not necessarily all criminals. Take for instance Cocaine. Coca (the plant used to make Cocaine) used to be found in "Coca Cola" in minute quantities. Its use was then fully legal. It's only in 1970 that people had to be licensed to administer it and that it became illegal for most of the population. Still now, Cocaine is still legal in the United States "for legitimate medical uses, such as local anesthesia for some eye, ear, and throat surgeries." [citation]
Saying that "drugs are illegal because all drug users are criminals" is circular reasoning.
When she was asked about it by an employee, she just walked away,
She's the one who approached the employee in the first place. She was inquiring about an incoming flight from Oakland. She was there for a pick up. And the employee wasn't even a security guard anyway.
If she's from the San Francisco Bay Area, and it sounds like she might be based on her appearance and the flight she was waiting for, walking away from what looks like an airport employee is perfectly natural. It's a conditioned response. At the SFO airport, the airport rents their information booths to extremely pushy fund-raising sales people. Those sales people are extremely aggressive. They'll often sit in their information booth and yell at travelers passing by raising one finger waving you over, as if they had some kind of official authority, or as if they had to tell you some super important official news. And you like a complete moron, you go over to them with your entire family and all your luggages because they just singled you out, they didn't call anyone else over, and they do look very official looking. Of course, when you get to their 'information' counter, they don't answer any of your questions, but they inundate you with a barrage of intrusive questions. And then, finally as you sense that something is wrong and are looking for a way to exit, they finally give you their spiel about helping some charity in Africa or whatever other bullshit that requires money from you.
I can't tell you how many times I've been taken in by this scam, and by that I mean just the walking over part, I've never actually given any money to them. And this scam isn't limited to the SFO airport anymore, in fact I haven't seen those people at the SFO airport recently (may be the rent has gotten too high for them), but people have tried to scam me in the same way at other airports, and the worst part is that those people don't take no for an answer. So now, if someone waves at me from an airport information booth, or whatever, I just give them the finger and walk away (in the past, I've even yelled a great big and loud fuck you to them, but that doesn't seem to deter them any less, those guys have an answer for everything).
In the US, the problem is standardization. And looking at the link of the plans you provided for Canada, it seems Canada is suffering from a similar problem as well (thought, my examples are going to be from the American market because that's the one I'm most familiar with).
In the US, when someone says night time minutes, or anytime minutes, it doesn't mean anything standard. One company's interpretation of night time minutes is anything after 6 pm, another one might be anything after 9 pm, and a third one might be anything after 10 pm (and the worst part is that a company's interpretation keeps on changing over time). And then, you have plans that include an arbitrary number of friends, mobile-to-mobile calls, voice mail/no voice mail/voice mail limited in some arbitrary way, etc. Which brings me to the way minutes or seconds are rounded up, some round at the second only (I think Nextel used to do that), some round every five seconds, some round at every 30 seconds, etc.
Same goes with data connection charges, sometimes companies charge per message, per kb, and/or per page downloaded. And forget about it when they say it's unlimited, MetroPCS provided me with an unlimited everything data plan (which I appreciated, MetroPCS is actually one of the better companies around), but it kept on disconnecting me between every two to four web page reloads (I'm now on T-Mobile by the way).
And don't get me started on locked cell phones, I have an unlocked Nokia E71 (it's technically an American edition, it's the E71-2), a friend of mine has an E71 (it's technically an E71-x American AT&T -- basically he's fucked edition). The two phones look basically identical, I'm good, but my friend is basically fucked.
And then of course, you have the difference between what's advertised and what's actually provided. Billing errors and service plan errors are way too common these days, especially if you're with AT&T apparently. And what I am describing is just the tip of the iceberg. The cell phone market in the US is a huge mess, it's very confusing, and that's just the way cell phone providers like it I think.
According to an Industry Canada spokesperson, "technical limitations" were to blame.
The quote above is the "official" reason the project was canceled, and for once, only this once I promise, I believe the official line. This kind of project has been tried before by many-many people. As a software project alone, without the support of some strong coercive governmental standardization laws, it's a huge and an almost impossible undertaking.
Actually, some property was taken despite the owners actively guarding an eye out. Read the article. And no, I'm not talking about the first item, which they actually gave away because they were going to get rid of it anyway. I'm talking about further down the article, their tether-ball thingy.
(Given the nature of the actual harm involved and the harshness of the penalties, I doubt you'd get one to look into prosecuting the case.)
The Feds should get involved. This issue isn't about getting the guy 20 years (give him a two thousand dollar fine and probation for all I care). It's about restoring faith in local police enforcement, and communicating to all other police officers that they are not above the law -- especially when they're acting as private citizens.
This case is important. It's probably far more important than many existing Federal cases out there, simply because of all the repercussions it will have on police enforcement and on the War on Police that's currently going on right now.
If we can actually start dealing fairly with police officers before issues get too far out of hand, then their own jobs will become that much easier and their own safety will become that much better later down the road.
But what if they want you to meet multiple people?
I agree with you. It's difficult to have an absolute rule on anything.
That being said, as a job-hunter it's your job to qualify your opportunities, and maximize the most effective use of your time. In fact, as you're suggesting yourself, doing phone interviews is a great way to minimize the number of on-campus visits. Another way is to qualify the people that are going to interview you. Are those people the actual decision-makers(official or otherwise)? Are those people qualified/knowledgeable about the actual work to be done? In this current economic environment, you'd be surprised by the actual number of hangers-on. People doing the interviews that have no business doing them in the first place.
And, you mustn't forget to qualify the opportunity itself. Do they really need to fill that position right now? Is this is going to be more of a brainstorming session? How much money are they losing every day this position remains unfilled? Is this position really the same one that was originally advertised? Etc.
And obviously, if they expect to waste your time, don't expect them to tell you this in advance. They won't. It's your job to get at this information as soon as possible, preferably through the use of the telephone and some carefully pointed questions, or perhaps through the grape vine, but either way -- try to get at this information long before you invest too much time into that one opportunity. Some opportunities just aren't worth it, or never even materialize.
'I am a manager of a small Software Development department, looking to hire some more developers. By edict of the CEO, the search must be made globally, so we are dealing with different cultures and different ideas of truth and embellishment, etc.
What about you? Are you looking for a job? What's your resume like? If your CEO is issuing edicts that he hasn't explained, or that perhaps are just arbitrary and seemingly capricious. It may be a tell-tale sign that you may want to look for employment elsewhere.
This is not to say that there aren't real good reasons for making developer searches global. I can definitely think of a few at the top of my head, but if you, as the hiring manager (and as the sole manager in Software Development of your company--it would seem), are not aware of those reasons -- you may want to look for a new better job yourself. After all, software development is difficult as it is, and there are enough real-world constraints to hiring a new developer as it is, being micromanaged by an uninformed CEO may be the last thing that your type of career needs right now.
So could someone please explain *why* is it a questionable research. It is like every other study where you study small amount of people and make estimates based on it to reflect whole population. Usually this amount of people also gives somewhat correct results on the whole population. Theres some error margin, but its close enough.
It's the fact there is a conflict of interest here. It's the same reason you don't let your own sales people do the final tally of their own sales, you have your own CFO/accountant do it. And it's the same reason you don't rely on your ad agency to tell you how successful their campaign was, you hire an independent third party usually Nielsen Ratings (which actually does way more than just television ratings) to tell you if the money you spent on the ad agency was even worth it to begin with (or not).
It's a question of proper financial controls and divisions of duties, because if the people paying for the study have a financial incentive to lie to you -- they *are* going to lie to you -- that much you can be certain of.
Wait a second-- where are these annotations coming from? When they erased the text of the books from Kindles, they didn't erase the annotations, but apparently archived them somewhere?
They better be. If by having access to those notes, it means we can prevent just one future terrorist from blowing himself up -- it will all have been worth it. Besides, server space is cheap and it's just all text anyway. There is really no reason -- not to keep them.
My point was that Climatology was not like one of the harder Sciences (like Physics or Chemistry).
I'm sure someone could argue that Political Science or Anthropology are actual Sciences. Personally, I wouldn't even call those Sciences (not even soft ones). This is not to disparage those fields, but I doubt you would either. That's just a strawman.
You mean "natural variation [of the Sun's output]" has been disproved by NASA as the cause of Global Warming. The parent you were replying to was talking about the natural variation of the temperature of the planet, not the natural variation of the Sun's output (he's even talking about errors of measurements of temperature the line before that one).
That's correct. However, I'd add a qualifier. Climatology is a *soft* science. Its very nature makes it difficult to run controlled experiments, or infer clear causal relationships to the degree that it has.
He doesn't make sense. Weather is distinct from climate. He is not qualified.
He didn't say weather. John Coleman said "Meteorology". And in the United States, the Science of Climatology is a *branch* of the Science of Meteorology (which was created during his tenure at the time, the guy is a freaking fossil).
Surely, if you want to discredit him, there must be better ways of doing it. New degrees are getting created all the time from larger existing fields. Who are you tell this 74 year old that this newly created field is no longer part of his domain??
ever serviced a discovery litigation from google ?
(you know where they judge you guilty of you dont come up with the data)
sorry but there is a good reason to keep this stuff on site and working...
Google Apps email allows you to keep all your inbound/outboung email archived, either through Postini or through your own in-house server (there are a dozen different ways to do this, there is no reason a company can't do this).
Slashdot Mirror
If it's that much of a concern, why don't the schools have a set of TI calculators that are available for standardized tests?
My school did that. It turned out it was way too expensive. TI calculators are designed to fail exactly 24 hours after their warranty expires. Better they go with Casio, or HP (assuming HP still makes calculators).
What will they do with people outside the US where the DMCA does not apply?
Put them on a hacker terrorist watch list and disappear them the next time they partake in a terrorist training camp (e.g. a math conference).
In the US, it doesn't, the Supreme Court made that clear. Yes, trackers are legal in the United States. In Canada, it's their laws or their judges that are being inconsistent in the case of trackers.
The original press release doesn't describe it as a "breakthrough". My guess is, that someone at treehugger.com determined that ad-revenue was their single greatest point of failure. So my guess is that this is a breakthrough but only for people with a very specific business model.
1) Teach them to take their own pulse, and they can learn a valuable skill to be used anytime
or
2) Use Heart Rate Monitors [...] that are only useful when they are present and work
Obligatory car analogy follows:
You can teach a new driver how to calculate his own speed and his own RPMs, but that information is not going to be as useful to him as if it was presented to him in real-time.
And in answer to your #2: No, that's the entire point of learning new habits. You need the most feedback when you're learning (when you're making corrections). Once you've successfully learned a new habit, you don't need all that extra feedback.
I think the trouble is that you've never had your own HRM. The HRMs that you find on machines at the typical gym are lousy.
These are middle school kids we are talking about though. I mean serious the PE instructor should be about to give 11-14 year olds a lecture about, if you feel faint, like your heart is racing, etc, etc. You need to stop and come see me.
PE is also about knowing when you should continue to push, to hit that next performance gain. I used to wear a hear-monitor when I went out running. I don't need to wear one anymore. I've learned to estimate my heart-rate pretty accurately because of it.
This should give the kids the same kind of self-awareness, that they'll be able to bring into adulthood. I guess you could teach kids to take their own pulse, as most schools already do, but I don't personally think this has the same motivational effect.
And as to the cost, the summary talked about the parents having to buy the strap for their kids, not the actual device. The school probably only has one or two devices anyway. It's not that you need to monitor every kid all the time. It's more of a teaching tool. And if the straps are the ones that you put around your chest, it's probably a good idea that the parents buy their own. Those get dirty with sweat easily, and they tend to break the more you use them (while the device(s) itself should be fine -- it should be able to service thousands of students for many years without breaking).
You mean, like what Toyota is starting to do (although, they haven't said if they'd let other car manufacturers join in, they probably won't I guess)
For example, Wifi in Starbucks requires a monthly fee from AT&T (or T-Mobile, can't remember).
Starbucks gives you two hours of free wifi per day (all you have to do is make a small purchase from them using one of their prepaid gift cards once every thirty days, the purchase can be anything, a small cup of coffee, a small candy, or whatever).
The only drawback is that it takes anywhere from 24 hours to 48 hours to get your initial access working after you've completed your initial online registration.
I don't follow. What collaboration? Do you mean a collaboration between the FSF and TomTom? What do they "want to keep dark"? Can you clarify your post please, preferably without the extraneous commentary.
You're analogy compared them to making drugs illegal wherein all users of drugs are criminals; hence by comparison in your analogy, all users of computers are criminals. As I said, bad analogy. Use your brain.
No, drug users are not necessarily all criminals. Take for instance Cocaine. Coca (the plant used to make Cocaine) used to be found in "Coca Cola" in minute quantities. Its use was then fully legal. It's only in 1970 that people had to be licensed to administer it and that it became illegal for most of the population. Still now, Cocaine is still legal in the United States "for legitimate medical uses, such as local anesthesia for some eye, ear, and throat surgeries." [citation]
Saying that "drugs are illegal because all drug users are criminals" is circular reasoning.
When she was asked about it by an employee, she just walked away,
She's the one who approached the employee in the first place. She was inquiring about an incoming flight from Oakland. She was there for a pick up. And the employee wasn't even a security guard anyway.
If she's from the San Francisco Bay Area, and it sounds like she might be based on her appearance and the flight she was waiting for, walking away from what looks like an airport employee is perfectly natural. It's a conditioned response. At the SFO airport, the airport rents their information booths to extremely pushy fund-raising sales people. Those sales people are extremely aggressive. They'll often sit in their information booth and yell at travelers passing by raising one finger waving you over, as if they had some kind of official authority, or as if they had to tell you some super important official news. And you like a complete moron, you go over to them with your entire family and all your luggages because they just singled you out, they didn't call anyone else over, and they do look very official looking. Of course, when you get to their 'information' counter, they don't answer any of your questions, but they inundate you with a barrage of intrusive questions. And then, finally as you sense that something is wrong and are looking for a way to exit, they finally give you their spiel about helping some charity in Africa or whatever other bullshit that requires money from you.
I can't tell you how many times I've been taken in by this scam, and by that I mean just the walking over part, I've never actually given any money to them. And this scam isn't limited to the SFO airport anymore, in fact I haven't seen those people at the SFO airport recently (may be the rent has gotten too high for them), but people have tried to scam me in the same way at other airports, and the worst part is that those people don't take no for an answer. So now, if someone waves at me from an airport information booth, or whatever, I just give them the finger and walk away (in the past, I've even yelled a great big and loud fuck you to them, but that doesn't seem to deter them any less, those guys have an answer for everything).
Did you hear that my fellow Americans? It sounds like they want us to go liberate them. We certainly could use the easy victory right now.
In the US, the problem is standardization. And looking at the link of the plans you provided for Canada, it seems Canada is suffering from a similar problem as well (thought, my examples are going to be from the American market because that's the one I'm most familiar with).
In the US, when someone says night time minutes, or anytime minutes, it doesn't mean anything standard. One company's interpretation of night time minutes is anything after 6 pm, another one might be anything after 9 pm, and a third one might be anything after 10 pm (and the worst part is that a company's interpretation keeps on changing over time). And then, you have plans that include an arbitrary number of friends, mobile-to-mobile calls, voice mail/no voice mail/voice mail limited in some arbitrary way, etc. Which brings me to the way minutes or seconds are rounded up, some round at the second only (I think Nextel used to do that), some round every five seconds, some round at every 30 seconds, etc.
Same goes with data connection charges, sometimes companies charge per message, per kb, and/or per page downloaded. And forget about it when they say it's unlimited, MetroPCS provided me with an unlimited everything data plan (which I appreciated, MetroPCS is actually one of the better companies around), but it kept on disconnecting me between every two to four web page reloads (I'm now on T-Mobile by the way).
And don't get me started on locked cell phones, I have an unlocked Nokia E71 (it's technically an American edition, it's the E71-2), a friend of mine has an E71 (it's technically an E71-x American AT&T -- basically he's fucked edition). The two phones look basically identical, I'm good, but my friend is basically fucked.
And then of course, you have the difference between what's advertised and what's actually provided. Billing errors and service plan errors are way too common these days, especially if you're with AT&T apparently. And what I am describing is just the tip of the iceberg. The cell phone market in the US is a huge mess, it's very confusing, and that's just the way cell phone providers like it I think.
According to an Industry Canada spokesperson, "technical limitations" were to blame.
The quote above is the "official" reason the project was canceled, and for once, only this once I promise, I believe the official line. This kind of project has been tried before by many-many people. As a software project alone, without the support of some strong coercive governmental standardization laws, it's a huge and an almost impossible undertaking.
I was actually kidding by the way.
No harm happened here.
Actually, some property was taken despite the owners actively guarding an eye out. Read the article. And no, I'm not talking about the first item, which they actually gave away because they were going to get rid of it anyway. I'm talking about further down the article, their tether-ball thingy.
(Given the nature of the actual harm involved and the harshness of the penalties, I doubt you'd get one to look into prosecuting the case.)
The Feds should get involved. This issue isn't about getting the guy 20 years (give him a two thousand dollar fine and probation for all I care). It's about restoring faith in local police enforcement, and communicating to all other police officers that they are not above the law -- especially when they're acting as private citizens.
This case is important. It's probably far more important than many existing Federal cases out there, simply because of all the repercussions it will have on police enforcement and on the War on Police that's currently going on right now.
If we can actually start dealing fairly with police officers before issues get too far out of hand, then their own jobs will become that much easier and their own safety will become that much better later down the road.
But what if they want you to meet multiple people?
I agree with you. It's difficult to have an absolute rule on anything.
That being said, as a job-hunter it's your job to qualify your opportunities, and maximize the most effective use of your time. In fact, as you're suggesting yourself, doing phone interviews is a great way to minimize the number of on-campus visits. Another way is to qualify the people that are going to interview you. Are those people the actual decision-makers(official or otherwise)? Are those people qualified/knowledgeable about the actual work to be done? In this current economic environment, you'd be surprised by the actual number of hangers-on. People doing the interviews that have no business doing them in the first place.
And, you mustn't forget to qualify the opportunity itself. Do they really need to fill that position right now? Is this is going to be more of a brainstorming session? How much money are they losing every day this position remains unfilled? Is this position really the same one that was originally advertised? Etc.
And obviously, if they expect to waste your time, don't expect them to tell you this in advance. They won't. It's your job to get at this information as soon as possible, preferably through the use of the telephone and some carefully pointed questions, or perhaps through the grape vine, but either way -- try to get at this information long before you invest too much time into that one opportunity. Some opportunities just aren't worth it, or never even materialize.
'I am a manager of a small Software Development department, looking to hire some more developers. By edict of the CEO, the search must be made globally, so we are dealing with different cultures and different ideas of truth and embellishment, etc.
What about you? Are you looking for a job? What's your resume like? If your CEO is issuing edicts that he hasn't explained, or that perhaps are just arbitrary and seemingly capricious. It may be a tell-tale sign that you may want to look for employment elsewhere.
This is not to say that there aren't real good reasons for making developer searches global. I can definitely think of a few at the top of my head, but if you, as the hiring manager (and as the sole manager in Software Development of your company--it would seem), are not aware of those reasons -- you may want to look for a new better job yourself. After all, software development is difficult as it is, and there are enough real-world constraints to hiring a new developer as it is, being micromanaged by an uninformed CEO may be the last thing that your type of career needs right now.
So could someone please explain *why* is it a questionable research. It is like every other study where you study small amount of people and make estimates based on it to reflect whole population. Usually this amount of people also gives somewhat correct results on the whole population. Theres some error margin, but its close enough.
It's the fact there is a conflict of interest here. It's the same reason you don't let your own sales people do the final tally of their own sales, you have your own CFO/accountant do it. And it's the same reason you don't rely on your ad agency to tell you how successful their campaign was, you hire an independent third party usually Nielsen Ratings (which actually does way more than just television ratings) to tell you if the money you spent on the ad agency was even worth it to begin with (or not).
It's a question of proper financial controls and divisions of duties, because if the people paying for the study have a financial incentive to lie to you -- they *are* going to lie to you -- that much you can be certain of.
Wait a second-- where are these annotations coming from? When they erased the text of the books from Kindles, they didn't erase the annotations, but apparently archived them somewhere?
They better be. If by having access to those notes, it means we can prevent just one future terrorist from blowing himself up -- it will all have been worth it. Besides, server space is cheap and it's just all text anyway. There is really no reason -- not to keep them.
My point was that Climatology was not like one of the harder Sciences (like Physics or Chemistry). I'm sure someone could argue that Political Science or Anthropology are actual Sciences. Personally, I wouldn't even call those Sciences (not even soft ones). This is not to disparage those fields, but I doubt you would either. That's just a strawman.
Natural variation has been disproved by NASA.
You mean "natural variation [of the Sun's output]" has been disproved by NASA as the cause of Global Warming. The parent you were replying to was talking about the natural variation of the temperature of the planet, not the natural variation of the Sun's output (he's even talking about errors of measurements of temperature the line before that one).
climatology is a science.
That's correct. However, I'd add a qualifier. Climatology is a *soft* science. Its very nature makes it difficult to run controlled experiments, or infer clear causal relationships to the degree that it has.
He doesn't make sense. Weather is distinct from climate. He is not qualified .
He didn't say weather. John Coleman said "Meteorology". And in the United States, the Science of Climatology is a *branch* of the Science of Meteorology (which was created during his tenure at the time, the guy is a freaking fossil).
Surely, if you want to discredit him, there must be better ways of doing it. New degrees are getting created all the time from larger existing fields. Who are you tell this 74 year old that this newly created field is no longer part of his domain??
Someone better tell the Unity Game Engine developers then, they just introduced a new plugin for Wii (and I'm sure they're not the only ones).
ever serviced a discovery litigation from google ?
(you know where they judge you guilty of you dont come up with the data)
sorry but there is a good reason to keep this stuff on site and working...
Google Apps email allows you to keep all your inbound/outboung email archived, either through Postini or through your own in-house server (there are a dozen different ways to do this, there is no reason a company can't do this).