Are you sure you know what exponential means? The simplest exponential equation has the form:
f(t) = a^t
The critical feature is that the functional variable (t) is in the exponential term.
The formula for annual growth rate, whether it's advertising revenue, interest, an economy or population is:
f(t) = x_0 (1 + r)^t where r is the growth rate. For 20% annual growth r = 0.2. The equation is most definitely exponential. Note also that expecting 6% / year growth, 1% / year growth or even 0.1 % / year growth is also exponential. Ask a biologist or physicist sometime whether exponential growth can last forever.
Actual research does support your conclusion, but your story doesn't. You required a minimum 50% male female ratio and you got it how does that tell you anything?
I was actually referring to the modern Intel compiler. Intel produces a set of quite good, highly optimized compilers. They've got some neat features like autovectorization and are highly tuned for Intel chips. They're quite good, but also quite expensive. If you're writing high performance stuff, it might well be worthwhile to shell out for the Intel ones.
Of course, if you're writing Windows programs there really aren't great alternatives to Visual Whatever.
It's not that gcc took a long time to replace, it really only dominated on Linux and OS X. It was free and did the job. Then it switched to the GPL v3, which scared Apple enough to pour some money into Clang/LLVM.
It's not impossible. Lots of people don't wash their hands very well.
There are studies, including very large ones, that show the more variety of microbes you're exposed to early in life, the less likely you are to suffer from autoimmune disorders. You may or may not be able to get some benefits in adulthood.
In the gut, it probably isn't a matter of having this or that bacteria, but rather having a variety, possibly a very large variety, in the correct proportions. It's possible that you could beneficially supplement your gut microbes by importing them from the environment, like children do. It's probably not a matter of eating skinny people microbes and not fat people ones, but rather having enough diversity.
Most MDs aren't biochemists. The extent of their understanding of things like cholesterol's role in the body depends entirely on whether they were paying attention in class that day. They almost certainly know the good cholesterol-bad cholesterol thing, but they may not know, or may not know well, that HDL and LDL aren't cholesterol at all, or that the latest research shows dietary cholesterol usually has very little effect on either. Several studies have shown that the average MD doesn't learn much past about five years post med school. For many that's while they're still doing their residencies.
To go with your computer stuff simile, while there's a guy in the back who actually knows the difference between a north bridge and a south bridge, the guy you're talking to in the showroom may or may not have just memorized the specs.
General relativity does require a beginning to the universe. Einstein realized that a universe dominated by an attractive force had to be either shrinking or expanding. He didn't think that was realistic, so he added the cosmological constant to balance the attraction of gravity and get a static universe. That was in 1907-1915. People started doing galactic redshift surveys (with a handful of close galaxies) around 1912, but it wasn't until the late 1920s that it started to be accepted that the universe was indeed expanding.
It turns out that even with a cosmological constant, GR doesn't admit a static universe.
Loop quantum cosmology also has a non-singular link between the end of a shrinking universe and the beginning of an expanding one. So does string theory, for that matter.
Women are also found to generally display the most (pro-male) bias in the workplace as well. Politically motivated feminists don't like to talk about that so much, but it doesn't mean it's not a problem. Working to remove prejudice, especially early on, seems to me to be a much more productive endeavour than trying to even things out with more discrimination.
Teachers aren't scientists. I'm not surprised your sister didn't get that concept.
The problem with the social sciences is that, while there are some trained scientists who do good science, there are also lots of non-scientists: clinical psychologists, historians, marketers, etc. I work in medical science and we have the same problem, lots of good scientists but also lots of physicians with very little scientific training churning out crap. University hiring committees and granting agencies also seem to be under the impression that an MD is a science degree.
Pure physics, chemistry and biology seem to have mostly avoided that, but their applied branches are similarly full of engineers, physicians, nurses, and other practitioners who aren't trained to do science and so frequently turn out non-scientific results. The OP is fooling himself if he thinks it's limited to the social sciences.
I find it's easier just to not follow "community leaders." Stallman does have a lot of supporters who do follow him pretty unequivocally though. I'm sure if he proposed a GPL v4 lots of people would use it. On the other hand, lots of people wouldn't, probably including the emacs maintainer who told Stallman his opinion on LLVM's debugger was irrelevant.
Maybe Stallman seems to be getting more extreme as he gets older. And lots of people and projects choose not to use the GPL v2 over the v3 (Linux is probably the most famous example) because they find the terms unacceptable, but that didn't stop it's introduction. IIRC there were quite a few people who were disappointed that the v3 didn't have a v3-or-newer provision.
My original post was joking, but I hadn't really thought about the implications of loopholes like you just mentioned. With a fairly trivial wrapper, one that could feasibly even be auto-generated, you could reduce any GPL-licensed code to an LGPL library. I'm certain that would piss Stallman off - I think he already regrets the existence of the LGPL: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy...
I'm curious, which GNU philosophies are you thinking of?
Stallman caused the GPL v3 to be written in large part to close things he saw as loopholes in v2, one of which was dynamic linking. IIRC he also discourages use of the LGPL in favour of the full GPL because the LGPL allows linking with closed code. I don't think it's much of a stretch to imagine that he'd regard wrapping a server around some GPL code as another loophole and, if it became prevalent and pissed him off, write a GPL version to cover it.
The sentences that preceded your quote ware, and I quote:
You need to realize that even if many times scientists funded by governments do not produce something useful to you in your day to day life, they do create knowledge which is essentials to scientists who work in the private sector.
Selective quotation doesn't really work so well when there's a moderately functional threading system like Slashdot's.
Irrelevant — because none of that earlier research was paid for by taxpayers either.
Certainly some of it was publicly funded, if not technically by taxpayers in the modern sense. Much of the basic research that Edison and Tesla took advantage of was done by scientists funded by royal or aristocratic patrons.
Yes, sure, I always suspected Linux kernel had something to do with quantum mechanics
You know the Linux kernel kind of requires computers to run it, right? Guess what the processors in those computers make use of?
You keep talking about "masked by terrain." It's irrelevant.
Ballistic projectiles follow parabolic trajectories that are described by the quadratic equation. The quadratic equation has two solutions. In gunnery these are often (incorrectly) called "direct" and "indirect." The distinction is that for a target at about the same level as the gun the "direct" solution will involve an elevation of less than 45 degrees and less travel time. The "indirect" solution has an elevation greater than 45 degrees and greater travel time. The "direct" solution is how you'd fire a hand held gun, because it's much easier to aim by eye. The "indirect" solution would be if you fired up into the air and the bullet killed someone when it came back down (which does happen).
You can do the math yourself if you want. Both solutions are perfectly valid using exactly the same initial velocity. Howitzers may reduce the charge when they're using high elevation indirect fire in order to reduce the shell's travel time and, for unguided shells, improve accuracy. It's not necessary though.
I provided a Wikipedia link with my OP, but if that's not good for you, here's the definition of murder from the New York penal code:
S 125.25 Murder in the second degree.
A person is guilty of murder in the second degree when:
1. With intent to cause the death of another person, he causes the death of such person or of a third person
New York also has a second provision that might apply in this case, and in the example you gave, but it still doesn't have anything to do with intent to cause harm:
2. Under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life, he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person, and thereby causes the death of another person
That's one of the theories about why animals fed antibiotics (which is standard practice) gain weight faster. Antibiotic effects on gut bacteria haven't been ruled out as factors in obesity, they look very much like they play a role. Artificial sweeteners also change the gut microflora. And I read an interesting paper the other day on effects of some normal-diet-level preservatives on the gut biota.
Of course it does. Since you mentioned Fourier analysis, do you know what the Fourier transform of a delta function is? It's a constant. Yup, equal power at all frequencies. A knife edge also has power in all frequencies. If you're "turning something on and off" at 100 hz then you have a situation somewhere between a 100 hz square wave, which has power in all frequencies (less possibly a few nodes of destructive interference), and a 100 hz sine wave, with power at only 100 hz. Either way, 100 hz is present.
Are you not familiar with Visual Basic/C/C++/whatever?
Or Intel's suite of compilers? Borland (or whatever they were called last)?
There have always been alternatives to gcc, but they usually cost money. I get the impression Clang/LLVM is more of a response to gcc running up against it's poor design rather than the GPL. Although Apple's support certainly did stem from some GPL antics.
If your first tool of choice (or what you have learned first) for iteration is loops you tend not to think of recursion as a solution. Similarly if you start with recursion (as is common with functional programming) you are a lot more likely to look at recursion as a tool for iteration.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you sure you know what exponential means? The simplest exponential equation has the form:
f(t) = a^t
The critical feature is that the functional variable (t) is in the exponential term.
The formula for annual growth rate, whether it's advertising revenue, interest, an economy or population is:
f(t) = x_0 (1 + r)^t where r is the growth rate. For 20% annual growth r = 0.2. The equation is most definitely exponential. Note also that expecting 6% / year growth, 1% / year growth or even 0.1 % / year growth is also exponential. Ask a biologist or physicist sometime whether exponential growth can last forever.
It shows that most schools were able to find one girl who would go. Your sample is rather heavily biased.
Actual research does support your conclusion, but your story doesn't. You required a minimum 50% male female ratio and you got it how does that tell you anything?
I don't think he is. He probably wanted to say "keep your sexism out of our classrooms" but instead had to say something politically acceptable.
If you've got some simple electronics knowledge, you could use one of these wifi modules: http://rayshobby.net/first-imp...
$3, wire up a switch, and write some software to monitor it. You could use one to make an accelerometer monitor for your wife too.
I was actually referring to the modern Intel compiler. Intel produces a set of quite good, highly optimized compilers. They've got some neat features like autovectorization and are highly tuned for Intel chips. They're quite good, but also quite expensive. If you're writing high performance stuff, it might well be worthwhile to shell out for the Intel ones.
Of course, if you're writing Windows programs there really aren't great alternatives to Visual Whatever.
It's not that gcc took a long time to replace, it really only dominated on Linux and OS X. It was free and did the job. Then it switched to the GPL v3, which scared Apple enough to pour some money into Clang/LLVM.
If only. I happen to work on a disease that has no good animal models. And people are notoriously reluctant to let to you section their brains.
It's not impossible. Lots of people don't wash their hands very well.
There are studies, including very large ones, that show the more variety of microbes you're exposed to early in life, the less likely you are to suffer from autoimmune disorders. You may or may not be able to get some benefits in adulthood.
In the gut, it probably isn't a matter of having this or that bacteria, but rather having a variety, possibly a very large variety, in the correct proportions. It's possible that you could beneficially supplement your gut microbes by importing them from the environment, like children do. It's probably not a matter of eating skinny people microbes and not fat people ones, but rather having enough diversity.
Most MDs aren't biochemists. The extent of their understanding of things like cholesterol's role in the body depends entirely on whether they were paying attention in class that day. They almost certainly know the good cholesterol-bad cholesterol thing, but they may not know, or may not know well, that HDL and LDL aren't cholesterol at all, or that the latest research shows dietary cholesterol usually has very little effect on either. Several studies have shown that the average MD doesn't learn much past about five years post med school. For many that's while they're still doing their residencies.
To go with your computer stuff simile, while there's a guy in the back who actually knows the difference between a north bridge and a south bridge, the guy you're talking to in the showroom may or may not have just memorized the specs.
General relativity does require a beginning to the universe. Einstein realized that a universe dominated by an attractive force had to be either shrinking or expanding. He didn't think that was realistic, so he added the cosmological constant to balance the attraction of gravity and get a static universe. That was in 1907-1915. People started doing galactic redshift surveys (with a handful of close galaxies) around 1912, but it wasn't until the late 1920s that it started to be accepted that the universe was indeed expanding.
It turns out that even with a cosmological constant, GR doesn't admit a static universe.
Loop quantum cosmology also has a non-singular link between the end of a shrinking universe and the beginning of an expanding one. So does string theory, for that matter.
Women are also found to generally display the most (pro-male) bias in the workplace as well. Politically motivated feminists don't like to talk about that so much, but it doesn't mean it's not a problem. Working to remove prejudice, especially early on, seems to me to be a much more productive endeavour than trying to even things out with more discrimination.
Teachers aren't scientists. I'm not surprised your sister didn't get that concept.
The problem with the social sciences is that, while there are some trained scientists who do good science, there are also lots of non-scientists: clinical psychologists, historians, marketers, etc. I work in medical science and we have the same problem, lots of good scientists but also lots of physicians with very little scientific training churning out crap. University hiring committees and granting agencies also seem to be under the impression that an MD is a science degree.
Pure physics, chemistry and biology seem to have mostly avoided that, but their applied branches are similarly full of engineers, physicians, nurses, and other practitioners who aren't trained to do science and so frequently turn out non-scientific results. The OP is fooling himself if he thinks it's limited to the social sciences.
I find it's easier just to not follow "community leaders." Stallman does have a lot of supporters who do follow him pretty unequivocally though. I'm sure if he proposed a GPL v4 lots of people would use it. On the other hand, lots of people wouldn't, probably including the emacs maintainer who told Stallman his opinion on LLVM's debugger was irrelevant.
Maybe Stallman seems to be getting more extreme as he gets older. And lots of people and projects choose not to use the GPL v2 over the v3 (Linux is probably the most famous example) because they find the terms unacceptable, but that didn't stop it's introduction. IIRC there were quite a few people who were disappointed that the v3 didn't have a v3-or-newer provision.
My original post was joking, but I hadn't really thought about the implications of loopholes like you just mentioned. With a fairly trivial wrapper, one that could feasibly even be auto-generated, you could reduce any GPL-licensed code to an LGPL library. I'm certain that would piss Stallman off - I think he already regrets the existence of the LGPL: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy...
I'm curious, which GNU philosophies are you thinking of?
Stallman caused the GPL v3 to be written in large part to close things he saw as loopholes in v2, one of which was dynamic linking. IIRC he also discourages use of the LGPL in favour of the full GPL because the LGPL allows linking with closed code. I don't think it's much of a stretch to imagine that he'd regard wrapping a server around some GPL code as another loophole and, if it became prevalent and pissed him off, write a GPL version to cover it.
The sentences that preceded your quote ware, and I quote:
Selective quotation doesn't really work so well when there's a moderately functional threading system like Slashdot's.
Certainly some of it was publicly funded, if not technically by taxpayers in the modern sense. Much of the basic research that Edison and Tesla took advantage of was done by scientists funded by royal or aristocratic patrons.
You know the Linux kernel kind of requires computers to run it, right? Guess what the processors in those computers make use of?
You keep talking about "masked by terrain." It's irrelevant.
Ballistic projectiles follow parabolic trajectories that are described by the quadratic equation. The quadratic equation has two solutions. In gunnery these are often (incorrectly) called "direct" and "indirect." The distinction is that for a target at about the same level as the gun the "direct" solution will involve an elevation of less than 45 degrees and less travel time. The "indirect" solution has an elevation greater than 45 degrees and greater travel time. The "direct" solution is how you'd fire a hand held gun, because it's much easier to aim by eye. The "indirect" solution would be if you fired up into the air and the bullet killed someone when it came back down (which does happen).
You can do the math yourself if you want. Both solutions are perfectly valid using exactly the same initial velocity. Howitzers may reduce the charge when they're using high elevation indirect fire in order to reduce the shell's travel time and, for unguided shells, improve accuracy. It's not necessary though.
I provided a Wikipedia link with my OP, but if that's not good for you, here's the definition of murder from the New York penal code:
New York also has a second provision that might apply in this case, and in the example you gave, but it still doesn't have anything to do with intent to cause harm:
That's one of the theories about why animals fed antibiotics (which is standard practice) gain weight faster. Antibiotic effects on gut bacteria haven't been ruled out as factors in obesity, they look very much like they play a role. Artificial sweeteners also change the gut microflora. And I read an interesting paper the other day on effects of some normal-diet-level preservatives on the gut biota.
Of course it does. Since you mentioned Fourier analysis, do you know what the Fourier transform of a delta function is? It's a constant. Yup, equal power at all frequencies. A knife edge also has power in all frequencies. If you're "turning something on and off" at 100 hz then you have a situation somewhere between a 100 hz square wave, which has power in all frequencies (less possibly a few nodes of destructive interference), and a 100 hz sine wave, with power at only 100 hz. Either way, 100 hz is present.
Sssssh. I foresee GPL v4.
Are you not familiar with Visual Basic/C/C++/whatever?
Or Intel's suite of compilers? Borland (or whatever they were called last)?
There have always been alternatives to gcc, but they usually cost money. I get the impression Clang/LLVM is more of a response to gcc running up against it's poor design rather than the GPL. Although Apple's support certainly did stem from some GPL antics.
For someone so convinced that his way is the best way, he's sure paranoid that some other way is going to take over.
If you learned assembly, you just roll your eyes.