Well, yes. If I really wanted to be cool about it, I might consider going to Radio Shack, and buying an Anduino. Then use the 4 outputs, plus a couple shift registers, to make something that could program an 80c51XA. Then design my algorithm to go on those, plugged together such that they'd outperform even an Nvidia.
Or, even cooler, I might program the 80c51XAs in parallel, one being the calculations chip, and one handling all the i/o from one unit to the other. Then I could write a massively parallel program that downloaded to the one, and ran on all.
Or I might just sit here on slashdot and imagine doing something cool.
Yes I do. He's extending the calculations begun by Lewis Carroll in the imaginary space (through the looking glass), to see the effects as the ultimate limit increases.
... do not require embarrassingly parallel solutions.
They require math and algorithm design to make the solution *nonembarrassing*.
Give you an example: a typical FFT can, with easy math, cut it number of calculations by four. With a little care, you can halve the number of calculations again.
Start with the math. Then look at the solution.
Last of all, consider cloudware. It's out there. Let's see... on my android, I have "sourceLair". Yeah, that's one.
Once you have the cloudware solution in hand, *then* you can start thinking about spending money on a kindof parallel solution (such as what Google uses).
) Hadn't they just swapped out their DISCRIMINATORS, possibly doing the calculations at the point of impact, instead of 20' up the cable, at the cable mount?
It was in Ayn Rand's book "Atlas Shrugged"... but there as the economy crashed and intellectualizated fakes replaced those who knew what they were doing, the invention was a magic motor that defied the 2nd law of thermo. As things go crash, people sometimes are more eager to publicise their magic machines, when they don't even understand what they are doing.
Not to overly accuse the physicists of CERN of being unqualified to do physics research, but...
(1) Hadn't there been something about the relativistic effects of the GPS satellites messing with the data?
(2) Hadn't they just swapped out their differentiators, possibly doing the calculations at the point of impact, instead of 20' up the cable, at the cable mount?
I'd think that a smart physicist would do anything he could to avoid FTL claims, because FTL claims also violate 2nd Thermo, and 2nd Thermo is a mathematical law -- it applies even to such things as data compression. To put it shortly, if you can do FTL particles, then you can send information back in time. If you can send information back in time, you an set up contradictions (overdefinition of equations, 3 equations 2 unknowns kind of thing). The contradictions themselves, by quantum mechanics, cancel themselves out.
Moreover, sending information back in time itself violates the 2nd law of thermo.
If you're going to violate FTL, you have to set up a system where contradictions are conceptually impossible. Whether or not that is ever going to be concievably possible, I doubt. But if you're just going to throw a particle FTL... I'd say no.
And given the start of A, start of B, and number of elements in each, parallelizes the sumproduct of A1*B(N) + A2*B(N-1) + A3*B(N-2)... + A(N-1)B2 + A(N)B1.
The reason for this, is that many, many differential equation initial-value-problems can be solved exactly using the Parker-Sochacki solution to the Picard iteration... but it is calculation intensive.
Doing this would allow live simulation on a grand scale.
Okay, it appears after looking at the simulation and then the actual flooding, that the program works best on mountainous islands.
The bright blue is the "flooding" area.
That said, the program appears to ignore wave height: the flooding area is the same for 10m and 5000m. Or more likely, it only checks the nearest surrounding kilometer.
Likewise, even if it shows the land flooding in (say) the Elizabeth River, it says that the tsunami didn't reach land: I guess that stuff that registers as "zero elevation" is not considered land, regardless.
No modding. I'll just wait until the modding is mostly done, and then reply. Usually, when people make a joke, they include some truth (or truth as they see it). Same is true for trolling. So I'll answer you as if you were serious.
Let me start by saying that the preponderance of evidence seems to imply the Bible is true. Considering that a miracle is best defined as a documented historical event that defies our understanding of our world, go and google "Catholic miracle", "Methodist miracle", even "Mormon miracle". Then pop over to a few other religions: Islam, Buddhism, Judaism. You'll find that Judaism has very limited miracles after 70 AD. Aside from the star in the moon, Islam has only those of the classification of "potato chips that look like a praying muslim." Buddhism doesn't seem to have much, and so on. But where they do have miracles, is when they involve Christians. Christianity has them regularly, and they are convincing.
But to answer your question, let me go you one better. Consider the lament after the two exiles, "they took the young men to grind, and the children were crushed under the wheel." Basically, you conscript 10 men to pull a large stone roller around in a circle, grinding grain. But if a couple of them are children and wear out, and you're beating them to go so fast that the children get crushed into the grain... well... it begs the question how a loving God can use such attrocities as a means of grace?
Thing is, He doesn't. He warns them ahead of time that if they go running after other gods, it's going to come to this. Moreover, the Bible identifies the other gods as thieves and demons, and pronounces a judgement of death upon them. So those other gods basically are like kidnappers who lure children away from the schoolyard with treats, only to kidnap and murder them when it's too late for them to return.
So the Creator God wants to preserve His creations, and the false gods are out to kill and destroy. It isn't the creator God's will at all. But if he publicizes the case, the bad events can at least be a warning to others.
But what do you do, then, with those humans who actively participate in luring children out to the kidnappers? Normally, that's a capital offense. Now, the Bible does also identify men who lie with other men (among others) as those who are given to that because they worship the creation, not the creator. So that may apply to your answer.
But as a Christian, I tend to prefer Jesus' answer to the adulteress: "go, and sin no more" (repent, and stop sinning. Then we don't need to condemn you. We can forgive you.)
So how do you repent? Peter noted the difference between himself and Judas: that worldly repentance leads to death, but Christian repentance leads to righteousness not to be repented of. But you can't have Christian repentance, unless you have a clear vision of God. Peter saw how he had hurt Jesus in denying him (Jesus looked at Peter, and Peter was grieved and ran away in tears). So you have to ASK Christ to give you a clear vision of God for repentance, and then seek Him with your whole heart until He does.
But it should be easy to start to see Him. Pull out the Gospels of Christ, and read them as a hero story. It's more poignant than the made-up story of the movie "Titanic." God likes hero stories too. Then look through history, and try to find what true hero stories you can, that even come close to matching them.
First of all, you'll see that there are very few, percentage-wise. But among those you do find, you typically are going to find that (a) they were not such a hero until they were empowered by Christ's own death and resurrection, and (b) that they did it by emulating Christ, and underlying His own hero story. It's only in such a context that you can find the Mother Teresas, the Maximillan Kolbes, and the John de Brebeufs of the world, as well as the Bernadette of Lourdes', the St. Patricks, and the stories of Peter, Paul, the Atlas Seven ("Of Gods and Men"), and others.
And no, these are not fictional. Part of their perfection is that they really happened.
Actually, as a Christian and an engineer, I can agree with the muslim GF post above, and disagree with your post entirely.
The Muslim GF poster is simply observing the trend of what is seen by their writings. Or, let me try it this way: his post is like talking about some "Institute for Metaphysical Physics" as nuts who can't figure out the 2nd law of thermo.
When you have a basic understanding of how philosophy and theology need to interact in order to be rational, and how they in turn need to interact with daily life in order to be at all relevant, you can quickly recognize drivel. In religious language, "drivel" is "heresy" (an active "taking away" of some vital part of the equation, like the 2nd law of thermo.)
So when he talks about heresy, he's saying that the professor can't get some logically vital part of the religion through his skull, usually because of some other agenda he has.
Aside from that, morals and ethics *were* created by religion, purely as a leftover castaway. They are spinoff industries. Morals and ethics are what you have left of right living, when you try to take away all the basis (God's own righteousness) from which it originated. Morals simply means "reasons of action", and Ethics simply means "a consistant rule of behavior." As such "More for Me" is an Ethic, though self-destructive. But it isn't right living, and can never be, because its source is removed.
Oh, that problem has already been solved. It's just a matter of time before the solution gets universally applied. If it matters, you might work on deployment, but I wouldn't bother to reinvent the wheel, especially since the deployment is in progress.
This is why it is incredibly important to look at the various PhD programs in your field, and consider the average rate of PhDs earned vs attempted, as well as the average number of years before completion.
At least in American universities in Physics, there have been some PhD programs where a person might get a PhD in only 4-5 years. Seven is typical. But there are other programs where the average PhD takes 15-20 years.
That sounds seriously broken. In some cases, it is seriously broken. I think my father told me about a case back in the 70s where a university professor was shot and killed by his grad student, who had been working on his PhD for over 22 years, and had his request to be done repeatedly denied. But that situation may be ideal for others: for example, for a student immigrant from an oppressive country, who *wants* to extend his student visa for as long as possible.
Such a person might stay in the US, raise a family, and eventually naturalize, all the while waiting to see if things change and improve "back home."
It just depends on what you want. But you have to look at the program. The statistics are published: look before you leap.
Tenure, like "academic freedom", was instituted for the protection of university management. More specifically, the university management would get various donations-on-a-string from various political, business, or civic leaders, which would be deadly to accept, and impossible to turn down.
"Here's ten million dollars for research for the university; I've already notified the press. Its only condition is that you must teach Lefthanded String Theory."
Too many of those, and a dean's going to be fired no matter what. If nothing else, the conflict between the Lefthanded String theory which is demanded by the last donation, and Righthanded String theory which is demanded by the next donation... would cause conflicts.
By giving the teachers academic freedom, the school can say "I'm sorry, the contracts with the teachers prohibit me from telling them what they should teach." In the end, they're likely to get the donations anyhow, but without the hook, line, and sinker. Tenure does the same thing, but acts against politically charged rival assassination.
How about... use Masters degrees for teaching and highly skilled grunt work, and PhD degrees for research?
(and yes, part of PhD training is learning how to research what has already been studied "in obscurity" by other PhDs in your own or other fields, that might affect your problem. So the PhD system isn't broken in that way.)
Indeed, the PhD system is broken, but not badly. It is broken in that universities are hiring PhDs to *nominally* teach, but in reality to do research.
But that system is only broken in the area of 4-year students who think they're paying for an education. It isn't broken for the research, and it isn't broken for smarter students who choose to go to a community college taught by Master's degree professors. They do get an education, and then can go on to a 4-year institution to finish it off or even get a MS themselves.
As for the students who graduate with a Masters, and get an underpaid grunt job, why not consider (a) teaching at community colleges... which really needs expansion (b) when setting up your 4-year senior project, do it in teams with an eye towards actual production and sale of a product when they're done. In other words, expand the senior project into a small business expansion setting. And get business majors and accounting majors in on the senior projects.
Now, when you graduate, you aren't looking for a job. You have a job, and as you make a success, the jobs are looking for you (and it isn't even in Soviet Russia).
You know, this is extremely reminiscent of the end of the book of Deuteronomy, "the song of Moses." Basically, Moses has spent all this time saying, "do good things, and God will bless you; do bad things, and He'll chatise you, and eventually destroy you out of the promised land."
In the Song of Moses, he says, "You can't do the good things: you're going to do the bad, and you're going to be destroyed out of the land."
If you're engaged in criminality, you can't keep clear of cardinal sins. You're going to commit one of them, because you're already handed over to them.
This French hacker looks like he succombed to Pride.
There is a huge difference between smart and wise.
There is a huge difference between smart and good.
There is a very small difference between wise and good.
Our society values smart.
P.S. Considering that this is an article about France, I'd say our American society, but a lot of our American values came from France, too. Very few participants in the French Revolution, for example, were wise. Many (such as Dr. Guillotine) were smart. Nope -- our entire society values smart. Not very wise, if you ask me.
Do you know, I think that if your friendships are based on "share with me", then no -- your friends will never be satisfied with how much you give them. And the sibling poster before me is right, too, in that the signal-to-noise ration becomes terrible for friendships.
And I'm sure that that is part of the cause of the problem, that makes it hard to solve the problem.
But there was a time when I worked for a man who was my father's former student, and on his way to being a billionaire. Now, that man had worked for a company that treated him more than justly, and thus had a good deal of money from one of his inventions (designed on company time) to start up his own business.
Unfortunately, it does not seem that he did the same for his own employees. For his own employees, he liked to hire them, use them for a while, and push them out. His non-competition agreements became quite abusive. And he always viewed remuneration in terms of "giving them" stuff, instead of justice. So in terms of those who were not on an equal and independent financial basis as him, he developed very few friendships or relationships with employees *except* for the "give me" attitude. That made him resentful.
The problem is, perhaps, that he viewed that his company was his, so what it earned was his. In other words, he was under the illusion that he was a self-made man.
When I lived in Lithuania, I saw enough thyroid problems that I couldn't call it rare. Same with melanomas.
Both were a secondary result of Chernobyl fifteen years before -- and the very bad lifestyle choice was that of living in the path of radioactive iodine and cesium.
I think that in the area of Japan, obesity will start to be a problem for a significant.5 - 1 percent of the population: those who don't actually die of thyroid cancer, but have a damaged thyroid.
It isn't all lifestyle choices. Sometimes it is; sometimes it isn't. Be careful, because an ill-timed remark can simply add to the burden of a person who already has burdens past counting. I'm sure they won't judge you as the cause of all their troubles -- but they won't count you as a ray of sunshine in their life, either.
Well, increased production for export translates into higher prices for the locals. Further, the increased production results in the exporting company getting more money, and buying up the land from the natives who were getting along just fine on their farmettes.
But who now can't get a decent wage, working that same increased production on that same land. So they starve.
And no, they don't have a choice in the whole deal. That's how neoliberal capitalism works.
Convince me that a college degree means greater financial wealth. Typically, I see all the profits sucked up by those in power, from the boss straight up to the president of the US.
The problem isn't birth control. The problem is arrogance and greed. And although I disagree with Ayn Rand on many things, I do agree with her that that arrogance and greed will destroy the production chain, and initiate great destruction of wealth. In fact, it is already happening.
In fact, it is happening at the hands of overeducated, under-wise people. I'll take a wise gardener or woodworker or family man for my ruler, over an educated whatever, any day of the week.
Let me add to this. Just supposing you *do* get all the energy out, possible... and you *do* transfer all that energy to useful carbohydrate production.
And let's suppose that we *don't* see a huge increase in phophate and potassium depletion...
Considering the track record of GE in America (Monsanto contaminating farmer's crops, and then charging huge amounts for the privilege), I do not believe that this will address hunger in the world. Rather, it will simply push the price of food up so high that it will become impossible for the poor to eat. We'll have mass starvation like never before.
Nor is this FUD. We saw the same thing happen when we pushed machinery-intensive farming on the 3rd world. We saw the same thing happen when the WTO pushed "infrastructure development" on the 3rd world.
Personally, I think these GE companies should be locked up. In fact, all these arrogant corporate leaders and governmental leaders and NGO leaders should be locked up, preferably in an insane asylum.
Now, if we can just figure out how to get the bell on the cat....
Okay, so you're saying that even if it happened here, it wouldn't be so horrible.
My point would be that considering our warlike attitude here in the US, it is a matter of time before we lose a war on US soil. Let's assume that the enemy takes us down with a conventional war (normal bombs, not even heavy uranium armored bombs). When that happens, then power lines *will* go down.
When that happens, a bunch of nuclear power plants *will* go up, in the Fukushima "spent fuel pool" manner.
And you don't think that will be just a little bit worse than Chernobyl?
Or perhaps you say that this is an argument against getting into wars?
I say that since we *are* getting into wars, this is an argument against nuclear power here in the US.
I'm more inclined to think that the magma flux normally creates hotspots (such as iceland or hawaii), but takes advantage of oceanic rifts to dump heat from nuclear reactions down below.
But I'm inclined to think that *it* matches the tectonics, not vice versa.
Iif you look at the sudden motion of India as Gondwana shattered (145 ma), and note that there are a huge number of craters from Tiera Del Fuego to South Georgia Island in a Shoemaker-Levy-9 style strike, and then map that over to Gondwana, I think it will become perfectly clear that low-angle asteroid strikes drive plate tectonics.
Note, too, that *if* Shiva is an asteroid, then it would appear that it too struck India at the time of the Yucatan strike (65 ma) with a low-angle strike travelling N-NE, and opened the Deccan Traps -- but also drove India straight from its location then to its location now. Quite simply, the Deccan Traps are evidence of India being partially torn in two.
Plate tectonics is a very low energy event (1/2 m v^2: For Australia, about 10 kJ. For the whole plate, about 45 kJ... similar to a big truck going 2 m/s) but a very high momentum event (p=m*v: For australia, 10x10^12 kg*m/s, for the plate, about 45x10^12 kg*m/s). Therefore, it takes momentum transfer, not energy transfer, to affect plate motion.
So... basically the problem here isn't a change in magma flux. Rather, it might be that everything is converging on Hawaii (China, Australia, the North American Plate, and so on), and that makes the Ring of Fire a rather hot place to be.
Or... the problem might be that instead of giving glory to God, we are gnashing our teeth and blaspheming Him. Maybe if we allowed our chastisements to change our hearts, the problems would cease.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that is cool. Maybe I could make something like that in Claymation, and put it on YouTube.
Well, yes. If I really wanted to be cool about it, I might consider going to Radio Shack, and buying an Anduino. Then use the 4 outputs, plus a couple shift registers, to make something that could program an 80c51XA. Then design my algorithm to go on those, plugged together such that they'd outperform even an Nvidia.
Or, even cooler, I might program the 80c51XAs in parallel, one being the calculations chip, and one handling all the i/o from one unit to the other. Then I could write a massively parallel program that downloaded to the one, and ran on all.
Or I might just sit here on slashdot and imagine doing something cool.
Yes I do. He's extending the calculations begun by Lewis Carroll in the imaginary space (through the looking glass), to see the effects as the ultimate limit increases.
What's
1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+ 1+1+1+1+1+1+ 1+1+1+1+1+1+ 1+1+1+1+1+1+
1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1
As I said, embarrassingly parallel. Get 7 computers working on it in parallel, with 1 for backup:
What's 1+1+1+1+1+1 (after some calculation, 6)
So that all is 42.
the ultimate answer is
1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+ 1+1+1+1+1+1+ 1+1+1+1+1+1+ 1+1+1+1+1+1+
1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1=42.
I should note that this mathematical calculation was also attempted by Douglas Adams, using genetic algorithms.
... do not require embarrassingly parallel solutions.
They require math and algorithm design to make the solution *nonembarrassing*.
Give you an example: a typical FFT can, with easy math, cut it number of calculations by four. With a little care, you can halve the number of calculations again.
Start with the math. Then look at the solution.
Last of all, consider cloudware. It's out there. Let's see... on my android, I have "sourceLair". Yeah, that's one.
Once you have the cloudware solution in hand, *then* you can start thinking about spending money on a kindof parallel solution (such as what Google uses).
) Hadn't they just swapped out their DISCRIMINATORS, possibly doing the calculations at the point of impact, instead of 20' up the cable, at the cable mount?
There, fixed that for me ;->
It was in Ayn Rand's book "Atlas Shrugged"... but there as the economy crashed and intellectualizated fakes replaced those who knew what they were doing, the invention was a magic motor that defied the 2nd law of thermo. As things go crash, people sometimes are more eager to publicise their magic machines, when they don't even understand what they are doing.
Not to overly accuse the physicists of CERN of being unqualified to do physics research, but...
(1) Hadn't there been something about the relativistic effects of the GPS satellites messing with the data?
(2) Hadn't they just swapped out their differentiators, possibly doing the calculations at the point of impact, instead of 20' up the cable, at the cable mount?
I'd think that a smart physicist would do anything he could to avoid FTL claims, because FTL claims also violate 2nd Thermo, and 2nd Thermo is a mathematical law -- it applies even to such things as data compression. To put it shortly, if you can do FTL particles, then you can send information back in time. If you can send information back in time, you an set up contradictions (overdefinition of equations, 3 equations 2 unknowns kind of thing). The contradictions themselves, by quantum mechanics, cancel themselves out.
Moreover, sending information back in time itself violates the 2nd law of thermo.
If you're going to violate FTL, you have to set up a system where contradictions are conceptually impossible. Whether or not that is ever going to be concievably possible, I doubt. But if you're just going to throw a particle FTL... I'd say no.
One thing that I think *would* be a win for scientific calculation programs of many sorts:
A program that takes two arrays of doubles,
A1,A2,A3,A4... A98, A99,A100...
B1, B2, B3,B4... B98,B99,B100...
And given the start of A, start of B, and number of elements in each, parallelizes the sumproduct of
A1*B(N) + A2*B(N-1) + A3*B(N-2)... + A(N-1)B2 + A(N)B1.
The reason for this, is that many, many differential equation initial-value-problems can be solved exactly using the Parker-Sochacki solution to the Picard iteration... but it is calculation intensive.
Doing this would allow live simulation on a grand scale.
Okay, it appears after looking at the simulation and then the actual flooding, that the program works best on mountainous islands.
The bright blue is the "flooding" area.
That said, the program appears to ignore wave height: the flooding area is the same for 10m and 5000m. Or more likely, it only checks the nearest surrounding kilometer.
Likewise, even if it shows the land flooding in (say) the Elizabeth River, it says that the tsunami didn't reach land: I guess that stuff that registers as "zero elevation" is not considered land, regardless.
No modding. I'll just wait until the modding is mostly done, and then reply. Usually, when people make a joke, they include some truth (or truth as they see it). Same is true for trolling. So I'll answer you as if you were serious.
Let me start by saying that the preponderance of evidence seems to imply the Bible is true. Considering that a miracle is best defined as a documented historical event that defies our understanding of our world, go and google "Catholic miracle", "Methodist miracle", even "Mormon miracle". Then pop over to a few other religions: Islam, Buddhism, Judaism. You'll find that Judaism has very limited miracles after 70 AD. Aside from the star in the moon, Islam has only those of the classification of "potato chips that look like a praying muslim." Buddhism doesn't seem to have much, and so on. But where they do have miracles, is when they involve Christians. Christianity has them regularly, and they are convincing.
But to answer your question, let me go you one better. Consider the lament after the two exiles, "they took the young men to grind, and the children were crushed under the wheel." Basically, you conscript 10 men to pull a large stone roller around in a circle, grinding grain. But if a couple of them are children and wear out, and you're beating them to go so fast that the children get crushed into the grain... well... it begs the question how a loving God can use such attrocities as a means of grace?
Thing is, He doesn't. He warns them ahead of time that if they go running after other gods, it's going to come to this. Moreover, the Bible identifies the other gods as thieves and demons, and pronounces a judgement of death upon them. So those other gods basically are like kidnappers who lure children away from the schoolyard with treats, only to kidnap and murder them when it's too late for them to return.
So the Creator God wants to preserve His creations, and the false gods are out to kill and destroy. It isn't the creator God's will at all. But if he publicizes the case, the bad events can at least be a warning to others.
But what do you do, then, with those humans who actively participate in luring children out to the kidnappers? Normally, that's a capital offense. Now, the Bible does also identify men who lie with other men (among others) as those who are given to that because they worship the creation, not the creator. So that may apply to your answer.
But as a Christian, I tend to prefer Jesus' answer to the adulteress: "go, and sin no more" (repent, and stop sinning. Then we don't need to condemn you. We can forgive you.)
So how do you repent? Peter noted the difference between himself and Judas: that worldly repentance leads to death, but Christian repentance leads to righteousness not to be repented of. But you can't have Christian repentance, unless you have a clear vision of God. Peter saw how he had hurt Jesus in denying him (Jesus looked at Peter, and Peter was grieved and ran away in tears). So you have to ASK Christ to give you a clear vision of God for repentance, and then seek Him with your whole heart until He does.
But it should be easy to start to see Him. Pull out the Gospels of Christ, and read them as a hero story. It's more poignant than the made-up story of the movie "Titanic." God likes hero stories too. Then look through history, and try to find what true hero stories you can, that even come close to matching them.
First of all, you'll see that there are very few, percentage-wise. But among those you do find, you typically are going to find that (a) they were not such a hero until they were empowered by Christ's own death and resurrection, and (b) that they did it by emulating Christ, and underlying His own hero story. It's only in such a context that you can find the Mother Teresas, the Maximillan Kolbes, and the John de Brebeufs of the world, as well as the Bernadette of Lourdes', the St. Patricks, and the stories of Peter, Paul, the Atlas Seven ("Of Gods and Men"), and others.
And no, these are not fictional. Part of their perfection is that they really happened.
To troll your troll (but in all seriousness):
The Name of God is admirable. Get with it.
Actually, as a Christian and an engineer, I can agree with the muslim GF post above, and disagree with your post entirely.
The Muslim GF poster is simply observing the trend of what is seen by their writings. Or, let me try it this way: his post is like talking about some "Institute for Metaphysical Physics" as nuts who can't figure out the 2nd law of thermo.
When you have a basic understanding of how philosophy and theology need to interact in order to be rational, and how they in turn need to interact with daily life in order to be at all relevant, you can quickly recognize drivel. In religious language, "drivel" is "heresy" (an active "taking away" of some vital part of the equation, like the 2nd law of thermo.)
So when he talks about heresy, he's saying that the professor can't get some logically vital part of the religion through his skull, usually because of some other agenda he has.
Aside from that, morals and ethics *were* created by religion, purely as a leftover castaway. They are spinoff industries. Morals and ethics are what you have left of right living, when you try to take away all the basis (God's own righteousness) from which it originated. Morals simply means "reasons of action", and Ethics simply means "a consistant rule of behavior." As such "More for Me" is an Ethic, though self-destructive. But it isn't right living, and can never be, because its source is removed.
Oh, that problem has already been solved. It's just a matter of time before the solution gets universally applied. If it matters, you might work on deployment, but I wouldn't bother to reinvent the wheel, especially since the deployment is in progress.
This is why it is incredibly important to look at the various PhD programs in your field, and consider the average rate of PhDs earned vs attempted, as well as the average number of years before completion.
At least in American universities in Physics, there have been some PhD programs where a person might get a PhD in only 4-5 years. Seven is typical. But there are other programs where the average PhD takes 15-20 years.
That sounds seriously broken. In some cases, it is seriously broken. I think my father told me about a case back in the 70s where a university professor was shot and killed by his grad student, who had been working on his PhD for over 22 years, and had his request to be done repeatedly denied. But that situation may be ideal for others: for example, for a student immigrant from an oppressive country, who *wants* to extend his student visa for as long as possible.
Such a person might stay in the US, raise a family, and eventually naturalize, all the while waiting to see if things change and improve "back home."
It just depends on what you want. But you have to look at the program. The statistics are published: look before you leap.
Tenure, like "academic freedom", was instituted for the protection of university management. More specifically, the university management would get various donations-on-a-string from various political, business, or civic leaders, which would be deadly to accept, and impossible to turn down.
"Here's ten million dollars for research for the university; I've already notified the press. Its only condition is that you must teach Lefthanded String Theory."
Too many of those, and a dean's going to be fired no matter what. If nothing else, the conflict between the Lefthanded String theory which is demanded by the last donation, and Righthanded String theory which is demanded by the next donation... would cause conflicts.
By giving the teachers academic freedom, the school can say "I'm sorry, the contracts with the teachers prohibit me from telling them what they should teach." In the end, they're likely to get the donations anyhow, but without the hook, line, and sinker. Tenure does the same thing, but acts against politically charged rival assassination.
How about... use Masters degrees for teaching and highly skilled grunt work, and PhD degrees for research?
(and yes, part of PhD training is learning how to research what has already been studied "in obscurity" by other PhDs in your own or other fields, that might affect your problem. So the PhD system isn't broken in that way.)
Indeed, the PhD system is broken, but not badly. It is broken in that universities are hiring PhDs to *nominally* teach, but in reality to do research.
But that system is only broken in the area of 4-year students who think they're paying for an education. It isn't broken for the research, and it isn't broken for smarter students who choose to go to a community college taught by Master's degree professors. They do get an education, and then can go on to a 4-year institution to finish it off or even get a MS themselves.
As for the students who graduate with a Masters, and get an underpaid grunt job, why not consider (a) teaching at community colleges... which really needs expansion (b) when setting up your 4-year senior project, do it in teams with an eye towards actual production and sale of a product when they're done. In other words, expand the senior project into a small business expansion setting. And get business majors and accounting majors in on the senior projects.
Now, when you graduate, you aren't looking for a job. You have a job, and as you make a success, the jobs are looking for you (and it isn't even in Soviet Russia).
Kalbies-tu Lietuviskai? As gyvanau Lietuve, 3 m. (nuo 2000 iki 2003), bet as iskeliau a JAV (USA) ir gyvaneu Amerikoje dabar.
You know, this is extremely reminiscent of the end of the book of Deuteronomy, "the song of Moses." Basically, Moses has spent all this time saying, "do good things, and God will bless you; do bad things, and He'll chatise you, and eventually destroy you out of the promised land."
In the Song of Moses, he says, "You can't do the good things: you're going to do the bad, and you're going to be destroyed out of the land."
If you're engaged in criminality, you can't keep clear of cardinal sins. You're going to commit one of them, because you're already handed over to them.
This French hacker looks like he succombed to Pride.
There is a huge difference between smart and wise.
There is a huge difference between smart and good.
There is a very small difference between wise and good.
Our society values smart.
P.S. Considering that this is an article about France, I'd say our American society, but a lot of our American values came from France, too. Very few participants in the French Revolution, for example, were wise. Many (such as Dr. Guillotine) were smart. Nope -- our entire society values smart. Not very wise, if you ask me.
Do you know, I think that if your friendships are based on "share with me", then no -- your friends will never be satisfied with how much you give them. And the sibling poster before me is right, too, in that the signal-to-noise ration becomes terrible for friendships.
And I'm sure that that is part of the cause of the problem, that makes it hard to solve the problem.
But there was a time when I worked for a man who was my father's former student, and on his way to being a billionaire. Now, that man had worked for a company that treated him more than justly, and thus had a good deal of money from one of his inventions (designed on company time) to start up his own business.
Unfortunately, it does not seem that he did the same for his own employees. For his own employees, he liked to hire them, use them for a while, and push them out. His non-competition agreements became quite abusive. And he always viewed remuneration in terms of "giving them" stuff, instead of justice. So in terms of those who were not on an equal and independent financial basis as him, he developed very few friendships or relationships with employees *except* for the "give me" attitude. That made him resentful.
The problem is, perhaps, that he viewed that his company was his, so what it earned was his. In other words, he was under the illusion that he was a self-made man.
When I lived in Lithuania, I saw enough thyroid problems that I couldn't call it rare. Same with melanomas.
Both were a secondary result of Chernobyl fifteen years before -- and the very bad lifestyle choice was that of living in the path of radioactive iodine and cesium.
I think that in the area of Japan, obesity will start to be a problem for a significant .5 - 1 percent of the population: those who don't actually die of thyroid cancer, but have a damaged thyroid.
It isn't all lifestyle choices. Sometimes it is; sometimes it isn't. Be careful, because an ill-timed remark can simply add to the burden of a person who already has burdens past counting. I'm sure they won't judge you as the cause of all their troubles -- but they won't count you as a ray of sunshine in their life, either.
Well, increased production for export translates into higher prices for the locals. Further, the increased production results in the exporting company getting more money, and buying up the land from the natives who were getting along just fine on their farmettes.
But who now can't get a decent wage, working that same increased production on that same land. So they starve.
And no, they don't have a choice in the whole deal. That's how neoliberal capitalism works.
Convince me that a college degree means greater financial wealth. Typically, I see all the profits sucked up by those in power, from the boss straight up to the president of the US.
The problem isn't birth control. The problem is arrogance and greed. And although I disagree with Ayn Rand on many things, I do agree with her that that arrogance and greed will destroy the production chain, and initiate great destruction of wealth. In fact, it is already happening.
In fact, it is happening at the hands of overeducated, under-wise people. I'll take a wise gardener or woodworker or family man for my ruler, over an educated whatever, any day of the week.
Let me add to this. Just supposing you *do* get all the energy out, possible... and you *do* transfer all that energy to useful carbohydrate production.
And let's suppose that we *don't* see a huge increase in phophate and potassium depletion...
Considering the track record of GE in America (Monsanto contaminating farmer's crops, and then charging huge amounts for the privilege), I do not believe that this will address hunger in the world. Rather, it will simply push the price of food up so high that it will become impossible for the poor to eat. We'll have mass starvation like never before.
Nor is this FUD. We saw the same thing happen when we pushed machinery-intensive farming on the 3rd world. We saw the same thing happen when the WTO pushed "infrastructure development" on the 3rd world.
Personally, I think these GE companies should be locked up. In fact, all these arrogant corporate leaders and governmental leaders and NGO leaders should be locked up, preferably in an insane asylum.
Now, if we can just figure out how to get the bell on the cat....
You can pay me now, or you can have a disaster later and let the taxpayers go farther into debt to foot the bill.
Bailouts are like that.
Shoot. Corporate presidents like that.
Okay, so you're saying that even if it happened here, it wouldn't be so horrible.
My point would be that considering our warlike attitude here in the US, it is a matter of time before we lose a war on US soil. Let's assume that the enemy takes us down with a conventional war (normal bombs, not even heavy uranium armored bombs). When that happens, then power lines *will* go down.
When that happens, a bunch of nuclear power plants *will* go up, in the Fukushima "spent fuel pool" manner.
And you don't think that will be just a little bit worse than Chernobyl?
Or perhaps you say that this is an argument against getting into wars?
I say that since we *are* getting into wars, this is an argument against nuclear power here in the US.
YMMV.
I'm more inclined to think that the magma flux normally creates hotspots (such as iceland or hawaii), but takes advantage of oceanic rifts to dump heat from nuclear reactions down below.
But I'm inclined to think that *it* matches the tectonics, not vice versa.
Iif you look at the sudden motion of India as Gondwana shattered (145 ma), and note that there are a huge number of craters from Tiera Del Fuego to South Georgia Island in a Shoemaker-Levy-9 style strike, and then map that over to Gondwana, I think it will become perfectly clear that low-angle asteroid strikes drive plate tectonics.
Note, too, that *if* Shiva is an asteroid, then it would appear that it too struck India at the time of the Yucatan strike (65 ma) with a low-angle strike travelling N-NE, and opened the Deccan Traps -- but also drove India straight from its location then to its location now. Quite simply, the Deccan Traps are evidence of India being partially torn in two.
Plate tectonics is a very low energy event (1/2 m v^2: For Australia, about 10 kJ. For the whole plate, about 45 kJ... similar to a big truck going 2 m/s) but a very high momentum event (p=m*v: For australia, 10x10^12 kg*m/s, for the plate, about 45x10^12 kg*m/s). Therefore, it takes momentum transfer, not energy transfer, to affect plate motion.
So... basically the problem here isn't a change in magma flux. Rather, it might be that everything is converging on Hawaii (China, Australia, the North American Plate, and so on), and that makes the Ring of Fire a rather hot place to be.
Or... the problem might be that instead of giving glory to God, we are gnashing our teeth and blaspheming Him. Maybe if we allowed our chastisements to change our hearts, the problems would cease.