If my understanding of patent law is right, even if taiwan did do its own independent research and made the medication now, it would not be able to use it because it was patented before. With patents the first to make the invention gets all the rights.
Do you think that makes sense during a crisis?
The Onion
-*AD*-
\!!/
-AD-cntnt/||\cntnt
cntnt \!!/
cntnt -AD-
cntnt/||\
\!!/ cntnt
-AD- cntnt/||\
What? Who doesn't appreciate the artfull design and delicate balance of subtle content decorted with blindingly colorful and flashy ads?
I think it's actually true. There have been studies that show women perceive detais better. Evolution has made it so that they can detect cheating mates better.
If you put cognitive concepts in a abstraction hierachy. Abstract concepts at the top of the tree and precise details at the bottom, it has been shown that women think more in terms of the concepts at the bottom of the tree and men think in term of the concepts at the top. Possibly explaining why women score lower on IQ which is biased towards the manipulation of abstract concepts. There are advantages and disadvantages in both method of thinking. Everything can be represented in different levels of abstraction. When you think using the more abstract representation you are able to see the big pictures and use logic and generalisations. You will however neglect much details. If you think using the more detailed concrete ideas, you will remember and use much more details and be able to detect subtleties better. There will however be too many concepts in your head at the same time to effeciently use logic and arithmetics on them,
"The above does not neccessarily apply when people actually spend some time to actually think and reflect" I think it does apply to a high degree pretty much all the time. If you studied language you would see how much of an unprecise and ambiguous thing it is. Unless you speak in predicate logic and algebra, langage is more of an noisy art than a clear communication device.
I concur. I helped build a beer refrigerator 3 years ago for a university engineering project using the same technology. It's nothing new. Its an impressive project for high school students. They probably did have to do some electronics to regulate the power so that they wouldn't damage the chips. But it's neither new nor inovative. Its an obvious use for these cooling chips that they bought on ebay.
Good example of clutter comes from President reagan's secretary of state who said: "at this juncture of maturization" to mean "now". And when an air force missile crashed, it "impacted with the ground prematurely".
These examples are from _On Writing Well_ by William Zinsser, a book that should be read by everyone.
One important argument that hasn't been discussed is the potential effect on the environment of such law. A very legitimate way for environmental groups to protect the environment is to purchase property and do environmentally sound things with it.
Buying and managing land is one of the best way to protect the environment without resorting to government regulation. (Example: http://www.ducks.org/)
This law enables government to force people who want to preserve an area to give it away to corporations that are going to trash the piece of land.
High property taxes are bad for the environment for the same reasons. It forces landowners to make profit from their properties in order to be able to afford them.
Ah, but it has been shown by Horning in his PHd thesis in 1969 that language is learnable from only positive inputs for a propabilistic grammar. Gold only shows that it isn't learnable for a discrete rules based (categorical) grammar. There are plenty of evidence that tells us the mind works on probabilistic principles hence the argument of poverty of stimulus fails. For more on this read "Probabilistic Linguistics" edited by Rens Bod, Jennifer Hay and Stefanie Jannedy (2003).
The high price is due to global scarcity, chinese demand and the fact Bush's economic policies have burned the value of the $USD$. And no need to invade the saudis because their oil industry is already controled by the US. Notice that oil is still at a lower price in the US than most other countries.
Your comment would be valid if the US military was used for defending freedom and deterring attacks. However, the US is invading countries and killing thousands of civilians.
Earlier you jumped on some guy because you said _he assumed_ something you said. Now you are doing the same thing by assuming I was referring to name calling. (When I was not) You have as much coherence as a seventies psychedelic movie. My grandmother had a better grasp of argumentation and logic than you when she was 6 years old.
The problem with accepting binary drivers is that linux is really just a bunch of drivers. If you accept a binary driver for the video card pretty soon you will have to accept a binary driver for the sound car, the network card, hard drive, motherboard components, CPU, memory managment... and suddently the whole Linux is proprietary!
The thing you say about it being difficult to make Linux drivers isn't true either. There is a mechanism to make binary driver modules in linux. Weather it is as good as the windows interface is debatable.
Re:Cognitive Machines Group @ MIT Media Lab
on
The Baby Bootstrap?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'm also currently ("currently" as in I'm writing this while my other computer is simulating bootstrapping based learning) working in this field and sucombing to frustration. I do believe we should see significant discoveries in the next 30 years but it won't come easy.
Godamn I've been procrastinating in the last few days because I am stuck on trying to compute probabilities in a probabilistic graph efficiently. One of the big hurdles I think is from the fact that we are trying to approximate a massively parallel architecture (the brain) on a _annoyingly_ serial machine (the computer).
On the bright side my procrastination has led me to design a prototype wind turbine out of a paper tube and straws. I even made a spreadsheet to compute optimal blade angle and chord
"Evolving a language is fine, but it should be a purpose-driven evolution to the benefit of communication by informed people, not a reversal just because your offspring are too lazy to communicate properly or are having trivial dicsussions over inadequate mediums."
When people subtitute easyer ways to write through lasiness, it actually make language better, because it makes it easyer and more efficient. This all happens through a natural brain mechanism meant to make language evolve to be as easy and usefull as possible.
"Language shouldn't be negatively changing to fit the medium, the medium should be evolving to adequately handle the language."
That is like saying that we shouldn't update our tools to fit new technological advancments we should instead use the new technology to make the old tools be easyer to use. Language is a communication tool. It doesn't make any sense to work for our tools. The tools should work for us.
For more info read The Language Log which is a blog writen by some of the world's leading linguists: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languag elog/
they have slashdot related entries: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagel og/archive s/000402.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/lang uagelog/archive s/000403.html
I actually thought the people were okay looking. I think the odd feeling came mostly from bad makup and in some scenes poor lighting. In some interior scenes you could see that the light was comming from spotlights behind the camera. That makes it feel very unatural.
no. as long as you have a random sample of the population big enough to be statisticly significant you are okay. There are statistical tests for this. For an example google: Student's t-test.
Slashdot Mirror
No I think Hypocracy as a class of people is an appropriate term in this case.
Its the Y2K+5 bug! Everyone panick!!!
If my understanding of patent law is right, even if taiwan did do its own independent research and made the medication now, it would not be able to use it because it was patented before. With patents the first to make the invention gets all the rights. Do you think that makes sense during a crisis?
The Onion -*AD*-
/||\cntnt /||\
/||\
\!!/
-AD-cntnt
cntnt \!!/
cntnt -AD-
cntnt
\!!/ cntnt
-AD- cntnt
What? Who doesn't appreciate the artfull design and delicate balance of subtle content decorted with blindingly colorful and flashy ads?
The Onion -*AD*- \!!/ -AD-cntnt /||\cntnt
cntnt \!!/
cntnt -AD-
cntnt /||\
\!!/ cntnt
-AD- cntnt /||\
What? Who doesn't appreciate the artfull design and delicate balance of subtle content decorted with blindingly colorful and flashy ads?
"Sorry but I find this to be 100% total bullshit"
I think it's actually true. There have been studies that show women perceive detais better. Evolution has made it so that they can detect cheating mates better.
If you put cognitive concepts in a abstraction hierachy. Abstract concepts at the top of the tree and precise details at the bottom, it has been shown that women think more in terms of the concepts at the bottom of the tree and men think in term of the concepts at the top. Possibly explaining why women score lower on IQ which is biased towards the manipulation of abstract concepts. There are advantages and disadvantages in both method of thinking. Everything can be represented in different levels of abstraction. When you think using the more abstract representation you are able to see the big pictures and use logic and generalisations. You will however neglect much details. If you think using the more detailed concrete ideas, you will remember and use much more details and be able to detect subtleties better. There will however be too many concepts in your head at the same time to effeciently use logic and arithmetics on them,
"The above does not neccessarily apply when people actually spend some time to actually think and reflect" I think it does apply to a high degree pretty much all the time. If you studied language you would see how much of an unprecise and ambiguous thing it is. Unless you speak in predicate logic and algebra, langage is more of an noisy art than a clear communication device.
America! Fuck Yeah!
I concur. I helped build a beer refrigerator 3 years ago for a university engineering project using the same technology. It's nothing new. Its an impressive project for high school students. They probably did have to do some electronics to regulate the power so that they wouldn't damage the chips. But it's neither new nor inovative. Its an obvious use for these cooling chips that they bought on ebay.
Good example of clutter comes from President reagan's secretary of state who said: "at this juncture of maturization" to mean "now". And when an air force missile crashed, it "impacted with the ground prematurely".
These examples are from _On Writing Well_ by William Zinsser, a book that should be read by everyone.
One important argument that hasn't been discussed is the potential effect on the environment of such law. A very legitimate way for environmental groups to protect the environment is to purchase property and do environmentally sound things with it. Buying and managing land is one of the best way to protect the environment without resorting to government regulation. (Example: http://www.ducks.org/) This law enables government to force people who want to preserve an area to give it away to corporations that are going to trash the piece of land. High property taxes are bad for the environment for the same reasons. It forces landowners to make profit from their properties in order to be able to afford them.
oh yeah caus " double-yu wiy ess iy double yu wiy gee" is better.
Ah, but it has been shown by Horning in his PHd thesis in 1969 that language is learnable from only positive inputs for a propabilistic grammar. Gold only shows that it isn't learnable for a discrete rules based (categorical) grammar. There are plenty of evidence that tells us the mind works on probabilistic principles hence the argument of poverty of stimulus fails. For more on this read "Probabilistic Linguistics" edited by Rens Bod, Jennifer Hay and Stefanie Jannedy (2003).
The high price is due to global scarcity, chinese demand and the fact Bush's economic policies have burned the value of the $USD$. And no need to invade the saudis because their oil industry is already controled by the US. Notice that oil is still at a lower price in the US than most other countries.
And don't forget Religious Conservatives, who'd kill to control your oil (If you're not Christian).
Your comment would be valid if the US military was used for defending freedom and deterring attacks. However, the US is invading countries and killing thousands of civilians.
"in fact its potential flaw lies in that the structures it represents can be so complicated the programmer can lose track." That's GOTO
Earlier you jumped on some guy because you said _he assumed_ something you said. Now you are doing the same thing by assuming I was referring to name calling. (When I was not) You have as much coherence as a seventies psychedelic movie. My grandmother had a better grasp of argumentation and logic than you when she was 6 years old.
Get a life
oh my god give it up. You're just making an ass of yourself.
The topics of the conversations were clearly set in the parent posts, there were no assumptions. He just Read The Fucken Parent Posts.
The problem with accepting binary drivers is that linux is really just a bunch of drivers. If you accept a binary driver for the video card pretty soon you will have to accept a binary driver for the sound car, the network card, hard drive, motherboard components, CPU, memory managment... and suddently the whole Linux is proprietary! The thing you say about it being difficult to make Linux drivers isn't true either. There is a mechanism to make binary driver modules in linux. Weather it is as good as the windows interface is debatable.
I'm also currently ("currently" as in I'm writing this while my other computer is simulating bootstrapping based learning) working in this field and sucombing to frustration. I do believe we should see significant discoveries in the next 30 years but it won't come easy.
Godamn I've been procrastinating in the last few days because I am stuck on trying to compute probabilities in a probabilistic graph efficiently. One of the big hurdles I think is from the fact that we are trying to approximate a massively parallel architecture (the brain) on a _annoyingly_ serial machine (the computer).
On the bright side my procrastination has led me to design a prototype wind turbine out of a paper tube and straws. I even made a spreadsheet to compute optimal blade angle and chord
fp!
"Evolving a language is fine, but it should be a purpose-driven evolution to the benefit of communication by informed people, not a reversal just because your offspring are too lazy to communicate properly or are having trivial dicsussions over inadequate mediums."
g elog/
l og/archive s/000402.htmlg uagelog/archive s/000403.html
When people subtitute easyer ways to write through lasiness, it actually make language better, because it makes it easyer and more efficient. This all happens through a natural brain mechanism meant to make language evolve to be as easy and usefull as possible.
"Language shouldn't be negatively changing to fit the medium, the medium should be evolving to adequately handle the language."
That is like saying that we shouldn't update our tools to fit new technological advancments we should instead use the new technology to make the old tools be easyer to use. Language is a communication tool. It doesn't make any sense to work for our tools. The tools should work for us.
For more info read The Language Log which is a blog writen by some of the world's leading linguists:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langua
they have slashdot related entries:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/language
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/lan
I actually thought the people were okay looking. I think the odd feeling came mostly from bad makup and in some scenes poor lighting. In some interior scenes you could see that the light was comming from spotlights behind the camera. That makes it feel very unatural.
no. as long as you have a random sample of the population big enough to be statisticly significant you are okay. There are statistical tests for this. For an example google: Student's t-test.