Yes, but there is no ongoing medical treatment that's required because of it, which means that the additional burden is still relatively minimal (especially because it's a recessive trait so the chances it'll show up in a kid is not even that good unless she reproduces with someone else who had that condition). It's not like she'll need expensive treatment for her entire life.
Anyway, after reading the wikipedia article on gastroschisis, it still sounds like it's a one-time fix, and there's no reason to expect that she'll be much more of a burden healthwise later in life than anyone else.
Oh stuff it. At least this article doesn't say what the "condition" that required operation was; for all you know it could be something that is just a one-time occurrence, or at least that requires a one-time fix for each person.
In theory, there would be no standing to sue under the good samaritan laws.
Except for the fact that they are being paid to provide care, which means that the Good Samaritan laws don't apply.
See Wikipedia: "As a result, medical professionals are typically not protected by Good Samaritan laws when performing first aid in connection with their employment."
I still think they would be able to get away with it given the proper contracts, otherwise you wouldn't see other "last ditch" attempts.
Well, to be fair, a lot of MSR stuff isn't available. A few researchers there put out a paper that talked about recording a trace from a binary's execution, one of the applications of which was a time-traveling debugger a la the Omnipotent Debugger for Java. I looked, but I couldn't find it online.
MSR is probably the best industry research lab in CS (at least that publishes; Google I'm sure has one that rivals it, but Google rarely publishes) on par with a darn good university, but I wouldn't call them OSS-friendly.
how can M$ possibly compete with other companies who come in at a price point nearly $0, with a better product, a good ad campaign, AND profit margins of nearly 100%?
100% of what, nearly $0?
(I am being somewhat facetious here. But only somewhat.)
In the end, open source is simply a better model for software development and its a lot more impervious to threats than proprietary software is. Businesses just don't get that. In a business, the software focus is on making money. In open source, the software focus is on quality and empowering the end user.
Or... more likely they do get it. (At least to the extent that you reveal in your post.) OSS is a better model for software development, but that doesn't mean it's a better business model. A business's goal isn't (and at least a large part of me says "shouldn't be") quality and empowering the end user except to the extent that they make business sense, and it is (and "should be") to make money. (There are limits to the "should" parts of that; e.g. violating the law or human rights or something like that.)
So is closed or open a better business model? I have no idea. But I suspect neither do you.
Hardware is cheap, so build more than one box for specialized tasks.
For a lot of people, it's not. My computer was both my computer and my TV for about 4 years as an undergrad. (And guess what: when I replaced the TV tuner about halfway through, I got one that still doesn't have Linux drivers!) Even if I had the money, the reason I didn't have a TV was space.
Maybe a better question is "why not?" You could very easily not have need for separate boxes, and if you don't, why spend more money than you have to just so you can create additional waste when you get rid of them?
Assuming we only want 2 text bars in the UI, I think it makes a lot more sense to put those features in the search bar than in the address bar.
Personally, I think the search bar is pretty useless. I set it up with keyword searches so I can search from the address bar. So I think your assumption is good as far as it goes, but I also think that the search bar is about as useless as you think the Awesome Bar is.;-)
Anybody in here does DDR as an exercise? Care to share the experience?
I did a couple summers ago. Between my living arrangements other times (dorm room == too small, and noisy floors for the last couple years) and being quite self-conscious has made it so this doesn't happen, but I plan on taking it up again after my upcoming move. I did it for about an hour a day almost every day, and not only is it actually fun (pretty much any other exercise I can do myself I don't like) but it seemed to work. My memories of that time are that when I went back to school I found myself getting winded easier and easier. Though could be an illusion or something.
In part that's because of the Unix philosophy of keeping programs separate. But you can get a lot of benefits if you can combine them, either into one program or through plugins. You can easily get things like asking your issue tracker "what revisions patched this?" or ask your VCS "what bugs does this commit fix?".
You can do this ad-hoc, for instance by making an issue tracker post like "fixed in r2901" and putting "fixes bug 425" in your commit messages, but it's nice to have things that are more principled.
Mercurial does "merge tracking," though its not listed as that, it is just inherently part of the system.
Well, to be fair, so does SVN now (finally!). I don't know how well it works.
I would second this poster though; if you haven't tried one of the distributed VCSs like Git or Mercurial (there are others, but these are the two that have looked most promising to me), you should. That said, it's not completely a given that you'll end up liking it more than SVN.
Actually, 1080p has 1920 lines of horizontal resolution (just under 2K, which is 2048)
Really? Why would lines of resolution be measured in powers of 2?
1080 isn't a power of 2. 1920 isn't a power of 2. 720 isn't a power of two. Nor is 480. So doesn't seem to me that resolution naturally falls on power-of-two boundaries. I would say 2K lines of resolution would be 2000 lines of resolution.
so i saved a few hundred dollars a year but had to spend 38K ????? what the hell is the point. PV can't ever replace base load power sources.
Keep in mind that this guy uses an absolutely absurd amount of electricity, to the point where he estimates saving something like $3000 per year, not a few hundred. Assuming flat energy costs and that the money wouldn't have been invested, he'll probably make that back before he retires if he stays in that house.
If solar would save you only a few hundred, you could drop the initial investment significantly. There are some fixed costs, but the "MW-produced" vs "price" graph does have a pretty steep slope.
That said, the numbers I've seen (not that I've looked into this more than on occasion) for most solar houses have put the time to recoup costs pretty far out... a decade or so. Even pretty small installations easily get into five digits. And there are a number of variables in the formula that will determine how long until you get your money back.
I'm also reminded of another episode they did on hybrid cars, where they declared them bullshit because of their weaknesses, showing none of their strengths.
It's a good show, but don't mistake it for a reliable source. It's punditry at best.
You can use square brackets to indicate a change for grammar or spelling, can't you?
The problem with this is that, as you say, 'You can [also] use square brackets to [totally misrepresent] a change [from what] you [said]'.
That's one benefit of using sic... you actually know what was originally said. Brackets are useful if you're making very minor changes (one commonly useful one is replacing a pronoun with what it refers to if you aren't quoting the antecedent itself), but if I saw "How is [a baby] formed? How [does a] girl get [pregnant]?" I would wonder why the heck the writer felt like putting words in the original speaker's mouth.
If you think sic is rude, just quote it verbatim and don't mark it at all. If I saw an article that was well-written except for a couple quotes that say things like "How is babby formed? How girl get pragnent?", I'm going to assume that you're quoting verbatim anyway.
Full disk encryption doesn't protect against the threat model that TrueCrypt's hidden files try to. The model there is that you are being forced to give up your key (or stand in contempt of court until you do), which means full disk encryption doesn't help you.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but there is no ongoing medical treatment that's required because of it, which means that the additional burden is still relatively minimal (especially because it's a recessive trait so the chances it'll show up in a kid is not even that good unless she reproduces with someone else who had that condition). It's not like she'll need expensive treatment for her entire life.
Guess that's what I get for skimming the article.
Anyway, after reading the wikipedia article on gastroschisis, it still sounds like it's a one-time fix, and there's no reason to expect that she'll be much more of a burden healthwise later in life than anyone else.
Oh stuff it. At least this article doesn't say what the "condition" that required operation was; for all you know it could be something that is just a one-time occurrence, or at least that requires a one-time fix for each person.
Perhaps the larger machines require too much blood to be in flight through the machine at any given time.
This is just a guess, I know nothing abotu dialysis machines.
In theory, there would be no standing to sue under the good samaritan laws.
Except for the fact that they are being paid to provide care, which means that the Good Samaritan laws don't apply.
See Wikipedia: "As a result, medical professionals are typically not protected by Good Samaritan laws when performing first aid in connection with their employment."
I still think they would be able to get away with it given the proper contracts, otherwise you wouldn't see other "last ditch" attempts.
Oh please. You think the idea hasn't occurred to them?
The RIAA may be blood-sucking mosquitoes who rape the justice system, but they aren't stupid.
Well, to be fair, a lot of MSR stuff isn't available. A few researchers there put out a paper that talked about recording a trace from a binary's execution, one of the applications of which was a time-traveling debugger a la the Omnipotent Debugger for Java. I looked, but I couldn't find it online.
MSR is probably the best industry research lab in CS (at least that publishes; Google I'm sure has one that rivals it, but Google rarely publishes) on par with a darn good university, but I wouldn't call them OSS-friendly.
how can M$ possibly compete with other companies who come in at a price point nearly $0, with a better product, a good ad campaign, AND profit margins of nearly 100%?
100% of what, nearly $0?
(I am being somewhat facetious here. But only somewhat.)
In the end, open source is simply a better model for software development and its a lot more impervious to threats than proprietary software is. Businesses just don't get that. In a business, the software focus is on making money. In open source, the software focus is on quality and empowering the end user.
Or... more likely they do get it. (At least to the extent that you reveal in your post.) OSS is a better model for software development, but that doesn't mean it's a better business model. A business's goal isn't (and at least a large part of me says "shouldn't be") quality and empowering the end user except to the extent that they make business sense, and it is (and "should be") to make money. (There are limits to the "should" parts of that; e.g. violating the law or human rights or something like that.)
So is closed or open a better business model? I have no idea. But I suspect neither do you.
Hardware is cheap, so build more than one box for specialized tasks.
For a lot of people, it's not. My computer was both my computer and my TV for about 4 years as an undergrad. (And guess what: when I replaced the TV tuner about halfway through, I got one that still doesn't have Linux drivers!) Even if I had the money, the reason I didn't have a TV was space.
Maybe a better question is "why not?" You could very easily not have need for separate boxes, and if you don't, why spend more money than you have to just so you can create additional waste when you get rid of them?
Assuming we only want 2 text bars in the UI, I think it makes a lot more sense to put those features in the search bar than in the address bar.
Personally, I think the search bar is pretty useless. I set it up with keyword searches so I can search from the address bar. So I think your assumption is good as far as it goes, but I also think that the search bar is about as useless as you think the Awesome Bar is. ;-)
Anybody in here does DDR as an exercise? Care to share the experience?
I did a couple summers ago. Between my living arrangements other times (dorm room == too small, and noisy floors for the last couple years) and being quite self-conscious has made it so this doesn't happen, but I plan on taking it up again after my upcoming move. I did it for about an hour a day almost every day, and not only is it actually fun (pretty much any other exercise I can do myself I don't like) but it seemed to work. My memories of that time are that when I went back to school I found myself getting winded easier and easier. Though could be an illusion or something.
(Disclaimer: I'm no scientist. Well, a computer scientist. But that doesn't apply here.)
Don't you mean "Damn it, I'm a computer scientist, not a doctor"?
...are two different things
In part that's because of the Unix philosophy of keeping programs separate. But you can get a lot of benefits if you can combine them, either into one program or through plugins. You can easily get things like asking your issue tracker "what revisions patched this?" or ask your VCS "what bugs does this commit fix?".
You can do this ad-hoc, for instance by making an issue tracker post like "fixed in r2901" and putting "fixes bug 425" in your commit messages, but it's nice to have things that are more principled.
Mercurial does "merge tracking," though its not listed as that, it is just inherently part of the system.
Well, to be fair, so does SVN now (finally!). I don't know how well it works.
I would second this poster though; if you haven't tried one of the distributed VCSs like Git or Mercurial (there are others, but these are the two that have looked most promising to me), you should. That said, it's not completely a given that you'll end up liking it more than SVN.
I have mod points, but I don't see (+1, Sad Truth) among the options...
Reading other threads below, looks like it is indeed 2048.
This is the problem with redefining terms that have been in use for a couple centuries...
Actually, 1080p has 1920 lines of horizontal resolution (just under 2K, which is 2048)
Really? Why would lines of resolution be measured in powers of 2?
1080 isn't a power of 2. 1920 isn't a power of 2. 720 isn't a power of two. Nor is 480. So doesn't seem to me that resolution naturally falls on power-of-two boundaries. I would say 2K lines of resolution would be 2000 lines of resolution.
For any "online" institution I've known, the tests need to be done at an approved institute under supervision, and after presenting proper ID, etc.
Well, that's the thing... they're trying to break that restriction.
so i saved a few hundred dollars a year but had to spend 38K ????? what the hell is the point. PV can't ever replace base load power sources.
Keep in mind that this guy uses an absolutely absurd amount of electricity, to the point where he estimates saving something like $3000 per year, not a few hundred. Assuming flat energy costs and that the money wouldn't have been invested, he'll probably make that back before he retires if he stays in that house.
If solar would save you only a few hundred, you could drop the initial investment significantly. There are some fixed costs, but the "MW-produced" vs "price" graph does have a pretty steep slope.
That said, the numbers I've seen (not that I've looked into this more than on occasion) for most solar houses have put the time to recoup costs pretty far out... a decade or so. Even pretty small installations easily get into five digits. And there are a number of variables in the formula that will determine how long until you get your money back.
Because Penn and Teller are a reliable source?
I'm also reminded of another episode they did on hybrid cars, where they declared them bullshit because of their weaknesses, showing none of their strengths.
It's a good show, but don't mistake it for a reliable source. It's punditry at best.
Paper recycling is pointless. It biodegrades...
Theoretically. Practically, no, not once it goes into a landfill. That's why you can still find readable newspapers from half a century ago.
As a rule, stuff doesn't really biodegrade once it goes to the dump.
You can use square brackets to indicate a change for grammar or spelling, can't you?
The problem with this is that, as you say, 'You can [also] use square brackets to [totally misrepresent] a change [from what] you [said]'.
That's one benefit of using sic... you actually know what was originally said. Brackets are useful if you're making very minor changes (one commonly useful one is replacing a pronoun with what it refers to if you aren't quoting the antecedent itself), but if I saw "How is [a baby] formed? How [does a] girl get [pregnant]?" I would wonder why the heck the writer felt like putting words in the original speaker's mouth.
If you think sic is rude, just quote it verbatim and don't mark it at all. If I saw an article that was well-written except for a couple quotes that say things like "How is babby formed? How girl get pragnent?", I'm going to assume that you're quoting verbatim anyway.
Personally, I like "Bruce Schneier already has a backup plan for when the second person discovers P=NP."
Full disk encryption doesn't protect against the threat model that TrueCrypt's hidden files try to. The model there is that you are being forced to give up your key (or stand in contempt of court until you do), which means full disk encryption doesn't help you.