Like every other product of culture, music is not something that materializes out of thin air - not without someone making that air vibrate. It's a finite commodity, produced on the efforts and skills of others, and will in fact dry up as soon as the people who create it can no longer continue to do so.
These things seem like they're only a matter of time. Everyone thought this was dead in France when ruled unconstitutional, then a week or two ago it was suddenly opened again. Sheer persistence ends up getting these things passed, regardless of the opposition and regardless of due process. It's almost inevitable.
In other words, politicians do what they want to do (or what other people convince them they want to do), whether or not it serves the interest of their constituents. And they'll keep trying until they get what they want. That persistence is probably one of the traits that got them elected in the first place, after all.
Although I'm sure it's not the only means that headhunters use to find candidates, I have access to my own Apache logs, complete with referrers, and can tell you that many headhunters who find and eventually contact me simply query Google for resumes with certain keywords in them. This isn't necessarily something a company needs to pay a middleman to do.
Many of the mice used in research are transgenic; that is, they're genetically modified in such a way that they're predestined to develop cancer. Others, such as the mouse described in the summary, have tumors implanted in them. When testing a treatment (rather than a cause), exposure to environmental carcinogens to promote development of a tumor is less common.
In any case, be glad you're not a lab mouse. Sometimes even the survivors are killed off at the end of the experiment (though this is becoming less common, particularly in cases where the mice are left in no lasting pain or disability).
I don't like taking tests simply because they are stressful. The more stress you put me through verifying my skill prior to hiring me, the more I will assume you will stress me out in the workplace, and, correspondingly, the more I will expect from you in exchange. If you insist on heavily testing your employees, be upfront both about the number and nature of the tests you administer and about the compensation for the position. If you can't find anyone after being forthcoming with this information, you are either asking too much or paying too little.
What if what you want to do with that time is walk? If time is the only consideration, it makes sense to drive just about anywhere within a 4 hour drive of you (and to fly further distances).
I'm not saying nothing useful has made it into the market yet... just that many of these futuristic technologies have yet to be successfully commercialized. I'm actually at a medical conference right now and many of the procedures being talked about here (all sorts of wonderful brain-machine interface techniques, novel metrics for assessing disease presence, progression, and response to treatment, regenerative procedures, EEG and fMRI time series algorithms, and biomedical classifiers of all sorts), though they have been done in research labs and universities all over the world, are at least 5 years away from mainstream clinical medicine.
Patients are getting the "stable" branch of medicine. Clinical trials are "testing". But what is going on in research labs - and most of what you're hearing about on Slashdot - is "unstable".
"Will advance in the next decade" is more accurate. Very few of these groundbreaking biotechnologies we hear about are ready for prime time yet (to use your example, when was the last time your dentist offered to regrow your tooth instead of using an implant?) Many of them still have yet to go through clinical trials. Some will never make it, but even those that do we won't see on the market for years.
If the immune system squashes it before it has a chance to cause symptoms, I'd call that an unsuccessful virus. Part of what makes a virus successful is the ability to evade the immune response.
When you need a major operation, you probably don't say "let me find a good enough doctor". You want the best! It's your life at stake! Medicine is the last place this attitude should become prevalent.
What's to stop them from doing it again with another class of articles? Maybe they'll decide that articles about healthcare are controversial next, and then they'll unilaterally restrict those too. And who is "trusted"? I've been editing Wikipedia casually for 6 years (originally actively, then more and more casually as I've been progressively locked out of the community), but an edit count "only" in the hundreds will probably place me in the class of users who can no longer freely edit this class of pages. I already couldn't vote in their elections for the same reason. Now I won't be able to freely contribute either.
They also have a pretty good "computerplace". They cover both the theoretical and systems aspects of the discipline, yet manage to present it in an interesting and intuitive way to the general public.
It's actually somewhat of an inverted bell curve as skill goes. Both people very skilled and very unskilled at something tend to have high estimations of their ability.
If it ran across some hitherto-unknown disease process, it may perhaps cluster the relevant images together as examples of a separate disease. Of course, it can't come up with this out of nowhere any more than a human can; it needs examples.
But all this is aside the point; its domain is radiology, not medical research. It's not meant to find new diseases... it's meant to help radiologists find suspicious areas and improve the accuracy of their diagnoses.
Slashdot Mirror
Like every other product of culture, music is not something that materializes out of thin air - not without someone making that air vibrate. It's a finite commodity, produced on the efforts and skills of others, and will in fact dry up as soon as the people who create it can no longer continue to do so.
And then you can hold the world hostage for ONE MILLION DOLLARS?
These things seem like they're only a matter of time. Everyone thought this was dead in France when ruled unconstitutional, then a week or two ago it was suddenly opened again. Sheer persistence ends up getting these things passed, regardless of the opposition and regardless of due process. It's almost inevitable.
In other words, politicians do what they want to do (or what other people convince them they want to do), whether or not it serves the interest of their constituents. And they'll keep trying until they get what they want. That persistence is probably one of the traits that got them elected in the first place, after all.
Then the summary is misleading in presenting this as a comparison of bitrates. The article is really comparing the audio quality of the two services.
Hormesis.
It looks like a Hilbert space filling curve to me.
Although I'm sure it's not the only means that headhunters use to find candidates, I have access to my own Apache logs, complete with referrers, and can tell you that many headhunters who find and eventually contact me simply query Google for resumes with certain keywords in them. This isn't necessarily something a company needs to pay a middleman to do.
There's probably a value-add that I'm not seeing.
Many of the mice used in research are transgenic; that is, they're genetically modified in such a way that they're predestined to develop cancer. Others, such as the mouse described in the summary, have tumors implanted in them. When testing a treatment (rather than a cause), exposure to environmental carcinogens to promote development of a tumor is less common.
In any case, be glad you're not a lab mouse. Sometimes even the survivors are killed off at the end of the experiment (though this is becoming less common, particularly in cases where the mice are left in no lasting pain or disability).
And just think how much easier it will be to wiretap people's connections without those pesky Telcos in the way.
I don't like taking tests simply because they are stressful. The more stress you put me through verifying my skill prior to hiring me, the more I will assume you will stress me out in the workplace, and, correspondingly, the more I will expect from you in exchange. If you insist on heavily testing your employees, be upfront both about the number and nature of the tests you administer and about the compensation for the position. If you can't find anyone after being forthcoming with this information, you are either asking too much or paying too little.
Because blessing hashes is just plain weird? :)
What if what you want to do with that time is walk? If time is the only consideration, it makes sense to drive just about anywhere within a 4 hour drive of you (and to fly further distances).
I'm not saying nothing useful has made it into the market yet... just that many of these futuristic technologies have yet to be successfully commercialized. I'm actually at a medical conference right now and many of the procedures being talked about here (all sorts of wonderful brain-machine interface techniques, novel metrics for assessing disease presence, progression, and response to treatment, regenerative procedures, EEG and fMRI time series algorithms, and biomedical classifiers of all sorts), though they have been done in research labs and universities all over the world, are at least 5 years away from mainstream clinical medicine.
Patients are getting the "stable" branch of medicine. Clinical trials are "testing". But what is going on in research labs - and most of what you're hearing about on Slashdot - is "unstable".
"Will advance in the next decade" is more accurate. Very few of these groundbreaking biotechnologies we hear about are ready for prime time yet (to use your example, when was the last time your dentist offered to regrow your tooth instead of using an implant?) Many of them still have yet to go through clinical trials. Some will never make it, but even those that do we won't see on the market for years.
If the immune system squashes it before it has a chance to cause symptoms, I'd call that an unsuccessful virus. Part of what makes a virus successful is the ability to evade the immune response.
When you need a major operation, you probably don't say "let me find a good enough doctor". You want the best! It's your life at stake! Medicine is the last place this attitude should become prevalent.
What's to stop them from doing it again with another class of articles? Maybe they'll decide that articles about healthcare are controversial next, and then they'll unilaterally restrict those too. And who is "trusted"? I've been editing Wikipedia casually for 6 years (originally actively, then more and more casually as I've been progressively locked out of the community), but an edit count "only" in the hundreds will probably place me in the class of users who can no longer freely edit this class of pages. I already couldn't vote in their elections for the same reason. Now I won't be able to freely contribute either.
No, but this sounds like an idea for the next Sims expansion pack.
They also have a pretty good "computerplace". They cover both the theoretical and systems aspects of the discipline, yet manage to present it in an interesting and intuitive way to the general public.
It's actually somewhat of an inverted bell curve as skill goes. Both people very skilled and very unskilled at something tend to have high estimations of their ability.
Big ego != nasty
Essentially the defense against this sort of exploit is "be less trigger-happy".
So you are arguing that picking your nose and conjecturing that there is another universe in your snot is equivalent in value to diagnosing cancer?
That's one thing that differentiates weak and strong AI... we're not trying to solve everything at once :)
If it ran across some hitherto-unknown disease process, it may perhaps cluster the relevant images together as examples of a separate disease. Of course, it can't come up with this out of nowhere any more than a human can; it needs examples.
But all this is aside the point; its domain is radiology, not medical research. It's not meant to find new diseases... it's meant to help radiologists find suspicious areas and improve the accuracy of their diagnoses.