The data from each CPAP manufacturer is locked-in to their ecosystem. Often the only way for users access their data is upload it to the manufacturer's system. This means that if you change manufacturer, then you can't take your old data with you. Even worse, sometimes the manufacturer also lock-in the user to their agent where the user needs to visit the agent to get a detailed report to provide to the sleep physician.
I am not convinced by the wind turbine syndrome but some are and they seem have dug their heels in. If the only two options are putting one of these in or not putting in any wind turbines at all due to community resistance, then their advantage is quite significant.
You make an interesting point. That article you linked to is Fiona Patten, the leader of the Australian Sex Party and the Eros Association so you have to admit that she’s not purely objective/independent in this situation. Also, I think both censorship and refugees have to do with civil liberties.
For the record, I agree with your position against that censorship, but I don’t see how you can conclude that it is the main issue in this election.
From my understanding, censorship in the context of the filtering Refused Classification (RC) rated internet content is impractical for a variety of reasons, will reduce internet speeds and could be a slippery slope to more draconian censorship. Australian’s treatment of refuges and the demonisation of the boat people already leads to pain, suffering and death of a very vulnerable group of people that Australia has already agreed to protect through international conventions.
When I look at it this way, I don’t see how you could conclude that censorship is a more important issue and voting should be made along censorship.
Governments using modern technology to support/educate users should be encouraged - it will assist the UK IT industry employment, grow UK IT capabilities and give citizens the information they need when they need it. But at the same time, a government should be careful not strongly benefit one closed source platform over other platforms. Of course this doesn't mean that the UK government should build applications in all mobile platforms - just that they should build at lease some software application on another platform - preferably an open source one.
Well I did RTFA but I agree with the GP as the arguments in the article weren't convincing.
According to the article: "Another possible explanation would be that engineers possess technical skills and architectural know-how that makes them attractive recruits for terrorist organizations. But the recent study found that engineers are just as likely to hold leadership roles within these organizations as they are to be working hands-on with explosives. In any case, their technical expertise may not be that useful, since most of the methods employed in terrorist attacks are rudimentary. It's true that eight of the 25 hijackers on 9/11 were engineers, but it was their experience with box cutters and flight school, not fancy degrees, that counted in the end."
The first point regarding the leadership roles seem like a non sequitur. Holding leadership roles could be a result of moving up through the ranks because of success at the practical level (eg hands-on with explosives) or analysis/planning/project managing (engineers learn more than just technicians). Or it could simply be the result of there being more engineers in these groups.
The second point regarding low tech methods also does not properly account for enginuity and innovation when there are massive resource and technical constraints. Also engineers are more than just technic
A quick google reveals: http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml "The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment."
Imagine how your government would react if it finds that a foreign nation (eg China) has been funding the opposition party.
I think Cuba's reaction is quite normal. Cuba does have human rights violations, but I'm not sure if this is one of them.
google will fade away and downsize. massively. its not IF but WHEN. been there long enough in the valley to see this a few times over. you watch.
But that statement is almost necessarily true - given enough time, every company, country, empire, plant will fade way. Or are you implying that this will happen in the next 10 years or less? It's hard to see how that would happen.
I agree, but what do you think about the reverse - if an employee is fired for being incompetent instead of them resigning? Would you still feel the same way?
>Yet his work was taken seriously, scientifically reviewed and is taught in >science classes even though some of it has no direct evidence.
I think the problem here is not just whether a given theory has enough evidence - it has more to do with whether the theory is disprovable.
The general consensus within philosophy of seem to be (thanks to Karl Popper) that a scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable. Scientists often have to come up with hypothesis that doesn't yet have much evidence backing them. They usually end up in this situation when they try to solve problems in current theories. But that is ok as long as their theories are disprovable - if not in practice, at least in theory. The more disprovable it is, the more useful it is.
Einstein's hypotheses were falsifiable in theory and in practice as science advances. I am yet to see how IT can be scientifically falsified even in theory.
Another (related) argument against promoting ID as Science is based on Occam's Razor - which is about preferring the theory with less independent entities. In other words, given the choice between ID and evolution, choose evolution because it does not require an intelligent creator.
>There's nothing wrong with the Crusades as such. Don't Christians have the right to defend themselves >when Muslims attack them?
How about No 6 of the Ten commandments: "Thou Shalt Not Kill"?
If not, what about "..for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. (Matthew 26.51-52) and "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." (Matthew 5:44 RSV) and "..whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39)
But then again, I'm sure that the people in charge back then would've argued that the crusades not only had God's blessing, but also that the crusades will go to heaven. There's nothing like the promise of eternal bliss to convince people to kill others.
While I agree with the general sentiment of your comment, I think it might be an oversimplification. While a good heart might help keep your customers happy, it can also send you out of business because of all the free work you are doing.
I find the biggest problem is the customer's unrealistic expectations with respect to the idea of value for money. While my experience is in corporate application support, I'd expect these problems are even worse in the home user market. I have customers who purchase bug support only and insist that I give them higher levels of support even though they're not willing to upgrade their support level. One of my customers calls me repeatedly for user support but rephrases it as a bug - "you application has a bug because it isn't doing this" - which means that I have explain to him how it works show that it isn't a bug, and there by giving him free user support/training.
I think that general rule is till true - you get what you pay for! From the vender's side, if you sell cheap products or services, the chances are that you will have low margins and will need to do high volume to make a profit. On the customer's side, if you decided to buy the cheapest product or service, then don't expect great service.
There seems to be two main incompatible choices about how time work. One is that the idea of one time-line the Novikov self-consistency principle of time seems to fall into this type.
The other is branching time in which and multiple N universes are created each moment uncertain point of time which could result in N different possible outcomes. In other words, it the case of Schrodinger's cat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%F6dinger's_cat two separate universes are created - one where the cat is alive and the other where it is dead.
I had Firefox installed on my XP PC since 1 and looks like all of those entries are gone from my registry.
On a separate note, Ctrl+N and File->New Window in FF has stopped working. I'm pretty sure this happed after I installed 1.0.3. Has anyone else experienced this?
You seems to be conveniently forgetting three things: 1 The punishment must suit the crime. Are you are advocating capital punishment for any crime? 2 The courts should deal with deciding what punishment, if any, should be handed out. Are you advocating vigilantism for anyone or do you personally have the ability and the right to decide is someone should die? 3 Should 1 and 2 be applied to you if someone dies accidentally? eg the neighbour's kid climbs your roof to retrieve his ball and get zapped.
First of all: IDNWFOGA (I do not work for other government agencies).
I think that the requirement may be to sanitise anything that has held a secret document. As well as the RAM and the HD, I wouldn't be surprised if they sanitised everything else that document came into contact with (the toner, paper in/out tray, etc). But this doesn't necessarily mean that RAM stores anything after shut down.
I honestly have no idea what M1 and M2 are, so can you please explain them to me? But if you do need to explain this to me (and you do), what does say about you post?
That's not a bad idea. It could also explain that "everything that has a beginning, has an end" comment as this could mean that Neo has to sacrifice himself. What do you think of my theory explained here?
I understood it a bit differently: The Oracle (while inside Smith) said something like "everything that has a beginning has an end" just before Smith tried to take over Neo. I think what happened is that when smith took over Neo, he also ended up taking over the whole matrix as Neo was directly connected to it. But since Smith is also part of the matrix, this created an infinite Smith-Controls-Matrix-Controls-Smith loop. And as Smith is a finite program (ie. he has a beginning), this wasn't possible and he ended up crashing/ dying (at least that's what happens when I write bad code).
Does that make sense at all? Maybe I need more pills.
I always thought the term smart card was a bit..Oh I don't know, unfounded?
The term "Smart Card" is suppose to reflect the fact that the card has a chip and therefore can process information. This is as oppose to the magnetic-strip cards which can only store information.
It has a digital signature, great, what happens when it's stolen? And used against the owner?
You can protect the information in the card with a password. The card can even be further protected by programming it to ask the User questions to which only the valid User would know the answers.
I'd like to see a card that had an image of your retina so they could tell if it was you, the eye has so many patterns, its almost impossible to fake.
This can be done by the smart cards and I believe some companies are already doing this. You can also use fingerprint information for even more security.
Slashdot Mirror
The data from each CPAP manufacturer is locked-in to their ecosystem. Often the only way for users access their data is upload it to the manufacturer's system. This means that if you change manufacturer, then you can't take your old data with you. Even worse, sometimes the manufacturer also lock-in the user to their agent where the user needs to visit the agent to get a detailed report to provide to the sleep physician.
I am not convinced by the wind turbine syndrome but some are and they seem have dug their heels in. If the only two options are putting one of these in or not putting in any wind turbines at all due to community resistance, then their advantage is quite significant.
It has already happened in an article by Emil Protalinski (the guy in the headline photo):
Facebook is suing Mark Zuckerberg
You make an interesting point. That article you linked to is Fiona Patten, the leader of the Australian Sex Party and the Eros Association so you have to admit that she’s not purely objective/independent in this situation. Also, I think both censorship and refugees have to do with civil liberties.
For the record, I agree with your position against that censorship, but I don’t see how you can conclude that it is the main issue in this election.
From my understanding, censorship in the context of the filtering Refused Classification (RC) rated internet content is impractical for a variety of reasons, will reduce internet speeds and could be a slippery slope to more draconian censorship. Australian’s treatment of refuges and the demonisation of the boat people already leads to pain, suffering and death of a very vulnerable group of people that Australia has already agreed to protect through international conventions.
When I look at it this way, I don’t see how you could conclude that censorship is a more important issue and voting should be made along censorship.
Here is the BBC story if anyone is interested: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10514367.stm
Governments using modern technology to support/educate users should be encouraged - it will assist the UK IT industry employment, grow UK IT capabilities and give citizens the information they need when they need it. But at the same time, a government should be careful not strongly benefit one closed source platform over other platforms. Of course this doesn't mean that the UK government should build applications in all mobile platforms - just that they should build at lease some software application on another platform - preferably an open source one.
Well I did RTFA but I agree with the GP as the arguments in the article weren't convincing.
According to the article:
"Another possible explanation would be that engineers possess technical skills and architectural know-how that makes them attractive recruits for terrorist organizations. But the recent study found that engineers are just as likely to hold leadership roles within these organizations as they are to be working hands-on with explosives. In any case, their technical expertise may not be that useful, since most of the methods employed in terrorist attacks are rudimentary. It's true that eight of the 25 hijackers on 9/11 were engineers, but it was their experience with box cutters and flight school, not fancy degrees, that counted in the end."
The first point regarding the leadership roles seem like a non sequitur. Holding leadership roles could be a result of moving up through the ranks because of success at the practical level (eg hands-on with explosives) or analysis/planning/project managing (engineers learn more than just technicians). Or it could simply be the result of there being more engineers in these groups.
The second point regarding low tech methods also does not properly account for enginuity and innovation when there are massive resource and technical constraints. Also engineers are more than just technic
A quick google reveals:
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml
"The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment."
Imagine how your government would react if it finds that a foreign nation (eg China) has been funding the opposition party.
I think Cuba's reaction is quite normal. Cuba does have human rights violations, but I'm not sure if this is one of them.
google will fade away and downsize. massively. its not IF but WHEN. been there long enough in the valley to see this a few times over. you watch.
But that statement is almost necessarily true - given enough time, every company, country, empire, plant will fade way. Or are you implying that this will happen in the next 10 years or less? It's hard to see how that would happen.
I agree, but what do you think about the reverse - if an employee is fired for being incompetent instead of them resigning? Would you still feel the same way?
It actually sounds more like the God Machine from the 'This Week in God' segment of the Daily Show.
:)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Daily_Show_recurring_segments#This_Week_in_God
I didn't realise Stephen Colbert 'senior voice designer'
I don't think that the IT industry has the regulatory pressures that the medical industry has, so he isn't comparing like with like.
>Yet his work was taken seriously, scientifically reviewed and is taught in
>science classes even though some of it has no direct evidence.
I think the problem here is not just whether a given theory has enough evidence - it has more to do with whether the theory is disprovable.
The general consensus within philosophy of seem to be (thanks to Karl Popper) that a scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable. Scientists often have to come up with hypothesis that doesn't yet have much evidence backing them. They usually end up in this situation when they try to solve problems in current theories. But that is ok as long as their theories are disprovable - if not in practice, at least in theory. The more disprovable it is, the more useful it is.
Einstein's hypotheses were falsifiable in theory and in practice as science advances. I am yet to see how IT can be scientifically falsified even in theory.
Another (related) argument against promoting ID as Science is based on Occam's Razor - which is about preferring the theory with less independent entities. In other words, given the choice between ID and evolution, choose evolution because it does not require an intelligent creator.
>There's nothing wrong with the Crusades as such. Don't Christians have the right to defend themselves
>when Muslims attack them?
How about No 6 of the Ten commandments: "Thou Shalt Not Kill"?
If not, what about
"..for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. (Matthew 26.51-52)
and
"Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." (Matthew 5:44 RSV)
and
"..whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39)
But then again, I'm sure that the people in charge back then would've argued that the crusades not only had God's blessing, but also that the crusades will go to heaven. There's nothing like the promise of eternal bliss to convince people to kill others.
While I agree with the general sentiment of your comment, I think it might be an oversimplification. While a good heart might help keep your customers happy, it can also send you out of business because of all the free work you are doing.
I find the biggest problem is the customer's unrealistic expectations with respect to the idea of value for money. While my experience is in corporate application support, I'd expect these problems are even worse in the home user market. I have customers who purchase bug support only and insist that I give them higher levels of support even though they're not willing to upgrade their support level. One of my customers calls me repeatedly for user support but rephrases it as a bug - "you application has a bug because it isn't doing this" - which means that I have explain to him how it works show that it isn't a bug, and there by giving him free user support/training.
I think that general rule is till true - you get what you pay for! From the vender's side, if you sell cheap products or services, the chances are that you will have low margins and will need to do high volume to make a profit. On the customer's side, if you decided to buy the cheapest product or service, then don't expect great service.
There seems to be two main incompatible choices about how time work. One is that the idea of one time-line the Novikov self-consistency principle of time seems to fall into this type.
The other is branching time in which and multiple N universes are created each moment uncertain point of time which could result in N different possible outcomes. In other words, it the case of Schrodinger's cat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%F6dinger's_cat two separate universes are created - one where the cat is alive and the other where it is dead.
It can't compare with Firefox - especially now that FF has momentum behind it. Hopefully the Opera voice stuff will take off.
Have a look here, it describes all the API:
http://www.daube.ch/share/win14.htmlAccording to that site you need to have EWH32.api, IA32.api, weblink.api and EScript.api for web pages.
I had Firefox installed on my XP PC since 1 and looks like all of those entries are gone from my registry.
On a separate note, Ctrl+N and File->New Window in FF has stopped working. I'm pretty sure this happed after I installed 1.0.3. Has anyone else experienced this?
You seems to be conveniently forgetting three things:
1 The punishment must suit the crime. Are you are advocating capital punishment for any crime?
2 The courts should deal with deciding what punishment, if any, should be handed out. Are you advocating vigilantism for anyone or do you personally have the ability and the right to decide is someone should die?
3 Should 1 and 2 be applied to you if someone dies accidentally? eg the neighbour's kid climbs your roof to retrieve his ball and get zapped.
First of all:
IDNWFOGA (I do not work for other government agencies).
I think that the requirement may be to sanitise anything that has held a secret document. As well as the RAM and the HD, I wouldn't be surprised if they sanitised everything else that document came into contact with (the toner, paper in/out tray, etc). But this doesn't necessarily mean that RAM stores anything after shut down.
"Lam Nguyen's job is to sit for hours in a chilly, quiet room devoid of any color but gray and look at pornography"
/. crowd. It's just as well it cold in there...
Hmm...sounds like a day in the life of the
I honestly have no idea what M1 and M2 are, so can you please explain them to me? But if you do need to explain this to me (and you do), what does say about you post?
That's not a bad idea. It could also explain that "everything that has a beginning, has an end" comment as this could mean that Neo has to sacrifice himself. What do you think of my theory explained here?
I understood it a bit differently:
The Oracle (while inside Smith) said something like "everything that has a beginning has an end" just before Smith tried to take over Neo. I think what happened is that when smith took over Neo, he also ended up taking over the whole matrix as Neo was directly connected to it. But since Smith is also part of the matrix, this created an infinite Smith-Controls-Matrix-Controls-Smith loop. And as Smith is a finite program (ie. he has a beginning), this wasn't possible and he ended up crashing/ dying (at least that's what happens when I write bad code).
Does that make sense at all? Maybe I need more pills.
I always thought the term smart card was a bit..Oh I don't know, unfounded?
The term "Smart Card" is suppose to reflect the fact that the card has a chip and therefore can process information. This is as oppose to the magnetic-strip cards which can only store information.
It has a digital signature, great, what happens when it's stolen? And used against the owner?
You can protect the information in the card with a password. The card can even be further protected by programming it to ask the User questions to which only the valid User would know the answers.
I'd like to see a card that had an image of your retina so they could tell if it was you, the eye has so many patterns, its almost impossible to fake.
This can be done by the smart cards and I believe some companies are already doing this. You can also use fingerprint information for even more security.