How typically biased. Yes, it can take a long time for the stuffed shirts of the AF to acknowledge a word, but if you listen to what French people actually say, you'll find they don't follow the rules and just use the words anyway. Kind of like here, come to think of it. Imagine that!
P.S. -- Watch what you say about the Borg, buddy. Oh, and, nice use of the colon.
While your basic point about physics and math seems right, I would just add that ease of use is still a consideration in math. We're lucky not to have to use Newton's notation for calculus (with its "fluxions") or Schwinger's for QED.
While I can appreciate the frustration you must feel, you have to realize that there's no chance someone can mow down a crowd of people with a modded PS2 box. At least, not yet.
Just a quick note to say what a refreshing attitude this is to find expressed. I, too, appreciate being corrected. So few people seem to, as though you were stealing something from them by relieving them of their opinion. (I think I'm channeling Socrates, or more likely, ripping off Plato.) Anyway, cheers.
If I was the lawyer my case would have been. Have you passed 4th grade reading? Really ok good then you knew you were screwing yourself have a happy. Here is a free pack on me.
You don't seem to understand the difference between "lawyer" and "judge." Why don't you look into it?
I look forward to a future case involving SCO with Darl trying to prove conclusively that he was too stupid to realize that his lawsuit was a load of BS.
Maybe I watch too much Law & Order, but I've heard that referred to as a plea of "not guilty by reason of mental defect."
That's what those terms came to mean after Kant (i.e., around 1781), but as you'll notice, they're in Latin, and are just perfectly ordinary phrases meaning "beforehand" and "afterwards."
On a side note, ex post facto, while expressed in something like Latin, is properly a barbarism: a late coinage that is in bad style (including a colliding and far from euphonious series of prepositions that no Latin poet would ever have uttered). Furthermore, it does not mean "after the fact," as factum means something done and ex means "out of" or "on the basis of." What ex post facto really means is "on the basis of something done afterward." This comes into legal terminology to refer to the situation where a new law makes a previous act illegal. Smart constitutions or bodies of laws have clauses that prevent things from being made illegal ex post facto, the new legislation in this case being the thing that is done afterward.
</pedantry> Sorry about that. Just had to get it out of my system.
Two signs of partisanship are an unwillingness to debate issues and a change of focus to the supposed character of whoever is delivering a certain message. You've demonstrated both in your various posts in this thread, presumably because all you have to say is "I'm suspicious." Be as suspicious as you like; the UCS isn't getting rich or getting elected on the basis of their message, so I remain more concerned with the evident motives for bias that the Bush administration doesn't even deign to defend.
Tubes wear out. As they wear out, their sound qualities change.
Also true of capacitors and other components. One of the interesting developments in software modeling of earlier electronic instruments (from my point of view), is that most now contain controls that enable you to emulate what these things sound like once they've been "worn in": everything from slight pitch inaccuracies to the sound of sticky rubber hammers (Emagic's EVD6 clavinet). In other words, they're modeling things you might have thought they would want to leave out.
They are called vacuum tubes, but they each actually contain individual fairies
Of course not, but they do contain extremely-hard-to-model non-linear responses of a bewildering variety of kinds. If they didn't, then no one would pay $500+ for DSP emulators like Native Instruments' recently released Guitar Rig, and everyone would just code their own in csound or Max/MSP.
In other words, the software market shows that it takes quite a lot to mimic the sound of classic tube amps (and speaker cabinets, etc.). So, when someone (who actually uses these things on a daily basis, for example) says that tube amps can't be matched by software, they're not necessarily saying there are magical fairies in their tubes (though some meatheaded guitarists might say that), they could be reflecting a knowledgeable point of view on the reality of the current situation.
Personally, since I use these things a lot (I do a lot of home recording) and have seen how they've progressed, I have no doubt that software will eventually match classic tube amp sounds for guitar; it may not even be that far in the future. But it ain't here now.
Professors in general are glad of being relieved of routine lecturing.
The issue is their being relieved of their intellectual property, not to mention their jobs, which would also deprive them of all the other benefits of the university environment that you mention. Professors who take knowledge seriously may well be keen on sharing it, but what's happening here is more like alienation: forced "sharing" is no sharing at all.
As a hobbyist programmer, I have one question: what the heck is a stack? I'm imagining stacks are things that slave daemons have to drive around on forklifts, while forced by their dominatrix MCP masters to wear subnet masks (for health-code compliance reasons, naturally).
This isn't meant as a criticism of this program, nor of MIT's, but the institutional push towards online courses is generally in the direction of making professors redundant.
At PSU, where I did my Ph.D., professors were being "invited" to develop entire courses to be offered over the Internet. They would receive course development funds, extra graduate teaching assistants, and in some cases research assistants. Sounds great, right?
What wasn't entirely clear (unless you read the fine print), was that once the course was developed, Penn State owned it. They could keep giving it (for money) for all eternity, and never pay the prof another dime. The only overhead for them was the webspace and processing (pff!) and a pittance for the wage-slave grad students and adjuncts hired to slog through tons of grading, e-mail hand-holding, etc.
I don't think either of the free course programs discussed here have quite the same aims or effect, but they are still part of a larger trend.
Since then, the quality of the Mac OS has increased significantly from the bad old days of Mac OS 7.5.5, where the little flag easter egg was the only good thing it had going for it.
That and the fact that I could play Might & Magic III on it.:-(
Slashdot Mirror
P.S. -- Watch what you say about the Borg, buddy. Oh, and, nice use of the colon.
While your basic point about physics and math seems right, I would just add that ease of use is still a consideration in math. We're lucky not to have to use Newton's notation for calculus (with its "fluxions") or Schwinger's for QED.
Oh, really?! That would be like outlawing pooping! Impossible to enforce and sure to cause an even bigger mess.
While I can appreciate the frustration you must feel, you have to realize that there's no chance someone can mow down a crowd of people with a modded PS2 box. At least, not yet.
Therefore, I propose that Apple re-rename this technology "FreedomTalk," or get the hell out of this country!!!
</jingo>
Just a quick note to say what a refreshing attitude this is to find expressed. I, too, appreciate being corrected. So few people seem to, as though you were stealing something from them by relieving them of their opinion. (I think I'm channeling Socrates, or more likely, ripping off Plato.) Anyway, cheers.
You don't seem to understand the difference between "lawyer" and "judge." Why don't you look into it?
Maybe I watch too much Law & Order, but I've heard that referred to as a plea of "not guilty by reason of mental defect."
On a side note, ex post facto, while expressed in something like Latin, is properly a barbarism: a late coinage that is in bad style (including a colliding and far from euphonious series of prepositions that no Latin poet would ever have uttered). Furthermore, it does not mean "after the fact," as factum means something done and ex means "out of" or "on the basis of." What ex post facto really means is "on the basis of something done afterward." This comes into legal terminology to refer to the situation where a new law makes a previous act illegal. Smart constitutions or bodies of laws have clauses that prevent things from being made illegal ex post facto, the new legislation in this case being the thing that is done afterward.
</pedantry> Sorry about that. Just had to get it out of my system.
They have a pill for that sort of thing now, you know. Technical problem indeed.
NOBODY expects the Third Man Argument.
Are you kidding? That's saving the environment. In the words of "the greatest man who ever lived," "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do.
Maybe so, but it didn't stop Newton and others of his time.
Ooh! I know! I know!
When Nixon created the EPA! (Even a bad 'un can do some good sometimes.)
Two signs of partisanship are an unwillingness to debate issues and a change of focus to the supposed character of whoever is delivering a certain message. You've demonstrated both in your various posts in this thread, presumably because all you have to say is "I'm suspicious." Be as suspicious as you like; the UCS isn't getting rich or getting elected on the basis of their message, so I remain more concerned with the evident motives for bias that the Bush administration doesn't even deign to defend.
I don't know, but I'm pretty sure it's the one right next to the statue of limitations.
Also true of capacitors and other components. One of the interesting developments in software modeling of earlier electronic instruments (from my point of view), is that most now contain controls that enable you to emulate what these things sound like once they've been "worn in": everything from slight pitch inaccuracies to the sound of sticky rubber hammers (Emagic's EVD6 clavinet). In other words, they're modeling things you might have thought they would want to leave out.
Here's a link for Guitar Rig, which seemed to have been stripped from my previous reply.
Of course not, but they do contain extremely-hard-to-model non-linear responses of a bewildering variety of kinds. If they didn't, then no one would pay $500+ for DSP emulators like Native Instruments' recently released Guitar Rig, and everyone would just code their own in csound or Max/MSP.
In other words, the software market shows that it takes quite a lot to mimic the sound of classic tube amps (and speaker cabinets, etc.). So, when someone (who actually uses these things on a daily basis, for example) says that tube amps can't be matched by software, they're not necessarily saying there are magical fairies in their tubes (though some meatheaded guitarists might say that), they could be reflecting a knowledgeable point of view on the reality of the current situation.
Personally, since I use these things a lot (I do a lot of home recording) and have seen how they've progressed, I have no doubt that software will eventually match classic tube amp sounds for guitar; it may not even be that far in the future. But it ain't here now.
Mod parent up! Why this gets modded down, I don't understand. It's a serious addition to the discussion.
The issue is their being relieved of their intellectual property, not to mention their jobs, which would also deprive them of all the other benefits of the university environment that you mention. Professors who take knowledge seriously may well be keen on sharing it, but what's happening here is more like alienation: forced "sharing" is no sharing at all.
But that can't be right.
At PSU, where I did my Ph.D., professors were being "invited" to develop entire courses to be offered over the Internet. They would receive course development funds, extra graduate teaching assistants, and in some cases research assistants. Sounds great, right?
What wasn't entirely clear (unless you read the fine print), was that once the course was developed, Penn State owned it. They could keep giving it (for money) for all eternity, and never pay the prof another dime. The only overhead for them was the webspace and processing (pff!) and a pittance for the wage-slave grad students and adjuncts hired to slog through tons of grading, e-mail hand-holding, etc.
I don't think either of the free course programs discussed here have quite the same aims or effect, but they are still part of a larger trend.
That and the fact that I could play Might & Magic III on it. :-(