try doing it for 20 users - I can only imagine what it must be like for systems with a few hundred users
The CSE dept at Penn State has StarOffice installed on the Solaris machines in their lab. They left this portion to the individual people. So if you want to use StarOffice, you go through the installation procedure on your account.
But if you want to describe the sample in and of itself, wouldn't you just want n instead of n-1?
If you want to describe the sample alone, yes, you would use n. However, I cannot think of any time you would want to describe only the sample. The reason you take a sample is so that you can draw conclusions about the whole population, so why would you want to get statistics about the sample? And if you want the standard deviation of the full population, you want n-1.
So in summary: If you have data from the whole population, use n, which is used by the population standard deviation. If you have data from a sample, use n-1, which is used by the sample standard deviation. These are the terms that I've seen used in the couple books I've looked in, and they are the same terms that are used in Excel.
Excel is a very poor choice for all but the most simple types of data analysis
And that's all well and good. The point is that OO Calc is not a choice for even the most simple types of data analysis.
The point isn't that you can do fancy stuff in Excel, but that if you need to slap together a quick least squares line, OO Calc won't work. If that's all you ever need to do, then there's no need to get something other than Excel.
The biggest probelms IMHO is that it allows the users to just click away at options until something they like appears. Very rarely will users give any thought to all the assumptions that are made when performing a regression anaylsis
That's not Excel's fault. You're blaming the tool for the inexperience/naivity/stupidity of the user.
You can get this with a couple free programs for windows. I have PDFCreator and it works fine. Slightly harder to use than choosing export to PDF from the menu, but not much harder.
I'm also going to add a subjective disadvantage to OOo: it's butt ugly. It looks like 2.0 fixed this, but I use Word when I'm in Windows mostly because I can't stand the interface of OOo.
Also, I'm going to add another esoteric benefit to Word: the revision markers (track changes) are much better in Word, especially the deleted text. Word puts the deleted text off to the side with an arrow pointing into the body to where it was removed from; OOo crosses out the deleted text in-place. That means that if you're reading a document that is tracking revisions, the deleted text interrupts your flow and makes it harder to read.
Another replay gave a link, but for people who are too lazy to click, the record authority has some rules. The main one is that the flight must be of a certain distance, which is the length of the tropic of Cancer/Capricorn.
"He didn't have the option of cutting his trip short and landing in Hawaii if he ran out of gas."
OTOH, I think the California to Hawaii hop is longer than Lindberg's flight.
Sure, Lindburg had much bigger balls than this guy, but you can't just say "oh, he coulda landed".
(Actually, it sounds like it's not so much he lost a ton of fuel as the instruments were underreporting what he had. Just my reading of what happened. Or else it was a publicity stunt.)
Courts will often use rulings by other jurisdictions to help with their decision. For instance, the US Supreme Court just cited a large amount of international opposition in their ruling about executing minors. (Not quite case law, but same deal.) Or a 4th Circuit Judge might base part of a ruling off of what the 7th Circuit ruled in a previous case.
However, the legal doctrine of stare decisis--"let the ruling stand"--doesn't apply in such cases. Stare decisis is the idea that prescedents from higher courts are binding. Thus if the Supreme Court rules one way, the 9th Circuit Court "must" follow what the Supreme Court says or have an extremely good chance of being overturned. (It also says the same court should be reluctant to overturn itself.)
By contrast, if two Circuit Courts rule differently and one of the cases reaches the Supreme Court, neither ruling has special standing over the other, even if one is a lot older.
To sum up, binding precedents encompasses a much smaller bredth of material than what you might consider case law.
You find me someone who has the motivation to do enough studying on their own to compensate for not going to school and I'll find you someone who already does.
So what this Microsoft executive is trying to do is wrong headed. You can't get people interested by pushing. There has to be an effort to remove any forces that discourage people from considering a vocation.
And you think this isn't a feedback loop?
One of the barriers in the way is the current low population of women in engineering fields. You can't just "remove" that barrier unless you try to discourage guys frong going into it, which is just stupid. So you gotta encourage women to enter the field directly.
agenda, n., pl. -das. (Usage note: "It is true that Cicero would have used agendum to refer to a single item of business before the Roman Senate, with agenda as its plural. But in Modern English a phrase such as item on the agenda expresses the sense of agendum, and agenda is used as a singular noun to denote the set or list of such items, as in The agenda for the meeting has not yet been set. If a plural of agenda is required, the form should be agendas: The agendas of both meetings are exceptionally varied.")
OED: "agenda, a. Pl. of AGEND (sense 3), treated as a singular."
In some cases, it does. Student-led prayer at high school football games was struck down as unconstitutional because of the stigma attached to not going along with it. There are other cases.
No, it means something. See the bit about 'no erasonable alternatives.' In actuality, there are two reasonable alternatives. One is to run the project without debugging (see a couple posts up the tree a bit), and one is to use a cross platform means such as adding a cin.ignore at the end. If the alternative was to do an incantation while dancing naked around the Dietel book, sure, the suggestion about adding system("pause") would be a worthwhile one to make. However, since you gain very little by this method over one of the two I mentioned, and lose a significant benefit, I don't think it's appropriate.
I'm also not entirely sure how I'm "pusing" Linux by suggesting that he write code that will work on an OS it's clear there's a good chance he'll be using... Sure, if the poster had said nothing about Linux, I could see it, but not ni this instance.
What he was takling about there is, IMO, irrelevant. It's clear that he has interest in programming on Linux from his other questions, so posting advice on a non-portable solution for anything is poor council unless there is no reasonable alternative.
And he was also asking about books for C++ programming on *Linux*, saying that the class might change to *Linux*, and complaining that *GCC* was giving error messages. Clearly he has some interest in portability.
Then it'll trigger on every internet shopping spree. That is so far outside of 'only alerting on illegal activity' that I don't see even this Court upholding it.
No, GPS is the system (US Or EU version) that we already have that works better than a lighthouse based GPS-work a like that someone else here proposed.
The "lighthouse based GPS-work a like" system is an adjunct to GPS as we have it now. The problem is that until you get to military-grade GPS equipment, the accuracy could be off by over 50 feet even on a good day. When you're motoring into shore, this can be significant; a lot of change in the depth of the seabed can occur over that distance.
The transmitters that would be placed along the shore would augment the satellite transmissions. If you are near such a transmitter, you can get the accuracy down to a couple meters instead of a couple dozen. It's called differential GPS.
GPS can tell you all of those things.
I know... those were listed as advantages to GPS...
I would argue that it doesn't work better, just well. The lighthouse can't help automated navigation systems, it can't display your location on a map, and it can't tell you where you are when there isn't a lighthouse nearby.
That said, it would be a very nice backup system for when a ship's GPS goes out, or for boats that don't have it, and I don't think that getting rid of lighthouses is a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
try doing it for 20 users - I can only imagine what it must be like for systems with a few hundred users
The CSE dept at Penn State has StarOffice installed on the Solaris machines in their lab. They left this portion to the individual people. So if you want to use StarOffice, you go through the installation procedure on your account.
And if you want the standard deviation of the full population, you want n-1.
By this I mean if you want the stddev of the full population calculated from sample data, you want n-1.
But if you want to describe the sample in and of itself, wouldn't you just want n instead of n-1?
If you want to describe the sample alone, yes, you would use n. However, I cannot think of any time you would want to describe only the sample. The reason you take a sample is so that you can draw conclusions about the whole population, so why would you want to get statistics about the sample? And if you want the standard deviation of the full population, you want n-1.
So in summary:
If you have data from the whole population, use n, which is used by the population standard deviation. If you have data from a sample, use n-1, which is used by the sample standard deviation. These are the terms that I've seen used in the couple books I've looked in, and they are the same terms that are used in Excel.
(Standard disclaimers, IANAS, yadda yadda yadda)
Excel is a very poor choice for all but the most simple types of data analysis
And that's all well and good. The point is that OO Calc is not a choice for even the most simple types of data analysis.
The point isn't that you can do fancy stuff in Excel, but that if you need to slap together a quick least squares line, OO Calc won't work. If that's all you ever need to do, then there's no need to get something other than Excel.
The biggest probelms IMHO is that it allows the users to just click away at options until something they like appears. Very rarely will users give any thought to all the assumptions that are made when performing a regression anaylsis
That's not Excel's fault. You're blaming the tool for the inexperience/naivity/stupidity of the user.
"pdf output;"
You can get this with a couple free programs for windows. I have PDFCreator
and it works fine. Slightly harder to use than choosing export to PDF from the menu, but not much harder.
I'm also going to add a subjective disadvantage to OOo: it's butt ugly. It looks like 2.0 fixed this, but I use Word when I'm in Windows mostly because I can't stand the interface of OOo.
Also, I'm going to add another esoteric benefit to Word: the revision markers (track changes) are much better in Word, especially the deleted text. Word puts the deleted text off to the side with an arrow pointing into the body to where it was removed from; OOo crosses out the deleted text in-place. That means that if you're reading a document that is tracking revisions, the deleted text interrupts your flow and makes it harder to read.
The length of the flight must be at least as long as the tropic of Cancer/Capricorn, and the path must not cross the 66 2/3 parallel.
Another replay gave a link, but for people who are too lazy to click, the record authority has some rules. The main one is that the flight must be of a certain distance, which is the length of the tropic of Cancer/Capricorn.
"He didn't have the option of cutting his trip short and landing in Hawaii if he ran out of gas."
OTOH, I think the California to Hawaii hop is longer than Lindberg's flight.
Sure, Lindburg had much bigger balls than this guy, but you can't just say "oh, he coulda landed".
(Actually, it sounds like it's not so much he lost a ton of fuel as the instruments were underreporting what he had. Just my reading of what happened. Or else it was a publicity stunt.)
Courts will often use rulings by other jurisdictions to help with their decision. For instance, the US Supreme Court just cited a large amount of international opposition in their ruling about executing minors. (Not quite case law, but same deal.) Or a 4th Circuit Judge might base part of a ruling off of what the 7th Circuit ruled in a previous case.
However, the legal doctrine of stare decisis--"let the ruling stand"--doesn't apply in such cases. Stare decisis is the idea that prescedents from higher courts are binding. Thus if the Supreme Court rules one way, the 9th Circuit Court "must" follow what the Supreme Court says or have an extremely good chance of being overturned. (It also says the same court should be reluctant to overturn itself.)
By contrast, if two Circuit Courts rule differently and one of the cases reaches the Supreme Court, neither ruling has special standing over the other, even if one is a lot older.
To sum up, binding precedents encompasses a much smaller bredth of material than what you might consider case law.
This is probably explained pretty poorly...
Or, more likely, would rather sit around reading /., LiveJournal, and porn sites all day.
You find me someone who has the motivation to do enough studying on their own to compensate for not going to school and I'll find you someone who already does.
So what this Microsoft executive is trying to do is wrong headed. You can't get people interested by pushing. There has to be an effort to remove any forces that discourage people from considering a vocation.
And you think this isn't a feedback loop?
One of the barriers in the way is the current low population of women in engineering fields. You can't just "remove" that barrier unless you try to discourage guys frong going into it, which is just stupid. So you gotta encourage women to enter the field directly.
So what you said was that on any issue at least part of the Federal Government feels each way, so no matter how it turns out, part of it wins?
Right, and the Federal Government prevails in this particular instance.
Not only that, but they occasionally buy up used copies to shred to reduce the market.
Supposedly.
agenda, n., pl. -das. (Usage note: "It is true that Cicero would have used agendum to refer to a single item of business before the Roman Senate, with agenda as its plural. But in Modern English a phrase such as item on the agenda expresses the sense of agendum, and agenda is used as a singular noun to denote the set or list of such items, as in The agenda for the meeting has not yet been set. If a plural of agenda is required, the form should be agendas: The agendas of both meetings are exceptionally varied.")
OED: "agenda, a. Pl. of AGEND (sense 3), treated as a singular."
Social stigma does not have the force of law.
In some cases, it does. Student-led prayer at high school football games was struck down as unconstitutional because of the stigma attached to not going along with it. There are other cases.
From what I understand, the differences between the radio series and the radio play scripts are significant ;-)
No, it means something. See the bit about 'no erasonable alternatives.' In actuality, there are two reasonable alternatives. One is to run the project without debugging (see a couple posts up the tree a bit), and one is to use a cross platform means such as adding a cin.ignore at the end. If the alternative was to do an incantation while dancing naked around the Dietel book, sure, the suggestion about adding system("pause") would be a worthwhile one to make. However, since you gain very little by this method over one of the two I mentioned, and lose a significant benefit, I don't think it's appropriate.
I'm also not entirely sure how I'm "pusing" Linux by suggesting that he write code that will work on an OS it's clear there's a good chance he'll be using... Sure, if the poster had said nothing about Linux, I could see it, but not ni this instance.
What he was takling about there is, IMO, irrelevant. It's clear that he has interest in programming on Linux from his other questions, so posting advice on a non-portable solution for anything is poor council unless there is no reasonable alternative.
And he was also asking about books for C++ programming on *Linux*, saying that the class might change to *Linux*, and complaining that *GCC* was giving error messages. Clearly he has some interest in portability.
Which will run really well when you try compiling it with another compiler...
Then it'll trigger on every internet shopping spree. That is so far outside of 'only alerting on illegal activity' that I don't see even this Court upholding it.
No, GPS is the system (US Or EU version) that we already have that works better than a lighthouse based GPS-work a like that someone else here proposed.
The "lighthouse based GPS-work a like" system is an adjunct to GPS as we have it now. The problem is that until you get to military-grade GPS equipment, the accuracy could be off by over 50 feet even on a good day. When you're motoring into shore, this can be significant; a lot of change in the depth of the seabed can occur over that distance.
The transmitters that would be placed along the shore would augment the satellite transmissions. If you are near such a transmitter, you can get the accuracy down to a couple meters instead of a couple dozen. It's called differential GPS.
GPS can tell you all of those things.
I know... those were listed as advantages to GPS...
I would argue that it doesn't work better, just well. The lighthouse can't help automated navigation systems, it can't display your location on a map, and it can't tell you where you are when there isn't a lighthouse nearby.
That said, it would be a very nice backup system for when a ship's GPS goes out, or for boats that don't have it, and I don't think that getting rid of lighthouses is a good idea.