Yes, actually, all the time. I have always been forbidden to use LaTex because supervisors want WYSIWYG and change tracking for editing. I see their point.
Word with proper use of cross references and styles works fine. You can type Tex into MathType for equations, or use LaTexIt (on a Mac). LaTexIt also works very nicely in PowerPoint or Keynote.
The only real problem with Word is that it's layout is buggy. Things don't stay where you put them. PowerPoint is a mess, but Keynote exports well enough for those backward conferences that don't support Macs.
arbitrarily small differences in initial conditions will eventually propagate into large differences. That's not something you find in the typical high-entropy system (like a bucket of air at room temperature and pressure).
It is indeed something you find in typical high-entropy systems, including your own example. You also find it in the same bucket of air at lower temperatures, although if you lower the temperature enough and freeze out the gasses you will not find it.
Yes, depending on the level you look at you may or may not find chaotic behaviour. That doesn't mean the system isn't chaotic. Weather is unpredictable at the molecular level, is moderately predictable at the system level over a few days, and is quite predictable over longer terms (when it's called climate). Certain dynamic climate systems are also generally predictable over longer terms, like the el nino/nina, monsoon, etc.
The OP specifically mentioned strange attractors, which are involved in chaotic systems that exhibit chaotic features but settle towards a predictable state or set of states (the attractor), just like the bucket of air. Psychohistory was specifically described this way: individuals were completely unpredictable, the precise timeline was moderately predictable, and the outcome was almost inevitable.
Perhaps they make an expert system to help improve debating style? Don't tell me what my argument boils down to.
My argument boils down to this: battlefield medicine rarely involves "give the injured soldier this pill." Usually the intervention is a series of physical actions, many of which are nontrivial. A person trained to perform these actions is MUCH better at it than a person who is being "talked through" the process. In a modern army pretty much everyone is trained to put pressure on a wound. Battlefield medics do more than that. Battlefield surgeons do even more. You simply can't put untrained people in those roles and expect them to perform at the level of trained people, no matter how much expert system support they have. That goes for many other specialist tasks in modern armed forces as well, from infantry soldier (it helps if they can fire accurately) through mechanic to fighter pilot.
You might suggest that in the future we'll have robotics capable of performing any skilled task as well as a person. We might. But if we do, the story is still silly because we won't have people doing the fighting anyway. Technology simply can't eliminate the advantages to having specialized human combatants without at the same time eliminating the need to have human combatants.
That doesn't mean it's subsidized. Subsidized implies that Broadcom is paying for each Raspberry Pi, either through selling components at a loss or by giving cash to the foundation.
If you mean Broadcom gave the Raspberry Pi Foundation a deal on components that would normally only be available to bigger customers, I can believe that. Actually subsidizing each board? Doubt it.
Sure it is. The movement of any air molecule is chaotic. You can't predict it for very long. Only the statistical distribution is predictable.
From the description of psychohistory in the book, the description of the second empire as a strange attractor is not particularly good since the path the galaxy took towards it, as well as the endpoint, was accurately predictable.
Just about anyone can be talked through landing an airplane (poorly) given lots of time and ideal conditions. Now try it in a storm.
Battlefield medicine is a lot of manual dexterity and muscle memory. By the time some computer talks you through the first suture knot the patient is long dead. And ten or fifteen more behind him.
Every scientist who wants to be taken at all seriously. Preprint services are just online document aggregators. Anyone can put anything they want there. And no, a group ranking system won't fix that. Even fields that have preprint services STILL have journals.
Journals currently provide two essential services - they put their reputation behind their review and publication procedures, and they maintain archives. If bad papers get through, the journal's reputation suffers. They don't want that, so they have a vested interest in making sure bad papers don't get through.
So rather than "Iceland actually totally fucked up at banking" what you meant to say was "some Icelandic banks totally fucked up and Icleand, unlike the rest of the world in a similar situation, DIDN'T fuck up."
A bunch of banks that happened to be in Iceland, but not backed by the government, made some promises they couldn't keep. A lot of people, mostly in the UK, fell for those promises, and when everything went belly up they demanded that the Icelanders make good on them, which would have essentially bankrupted the country. The Icelanders felt that wasn't fair, and had the wherewithal to tell the banks, the investors, and the countries that were backing them, to go to hell.
1) Precise is precise. It either is or it isn't. Saying "more precise" is like saying "more pregnant".
Precision is a measurable quantity. If something is "precise," it meets some arbitrary threshold of precision. That doesn't mean it can't be more precise.
Put another way, determine the precision of a measurement that is "precise." Now double the precision. Is the measurement "more precise?" Yes it is.
Ah, it's the medium not the message. I see. So reading to your kids, from your holy book purported to be the source of all morality, about how the only man who survived from Sodom and Gomorrah (saved personally by God) offered up his two virgin daughters to a violent crowd bent on rape to "do to them whatever you like" is okay, because it's written down and not a visual depiction?
I'm not distorting the comparison, much less again. That was you, remember? All I said was that the bible contained these things, and if you like, I can find an example of each one. You probably know where they are already though, or you would, if you'd read the bible. But you ARE again accusing me of things I didn't say. I didn't ever say I didn't like the bible. If you skip the boring bits, like the genealogies in Genesis, it's a pretty good read. Action packed, lots of sex and violence, moral ambiguity, characters who constantly fall prey to their pride, conceit or prejudice. Especially that God character.
There are even some good moral lessons in the bible. Lots of sound bites too. One of my favourites, appropriate here since we're talking (obliquely) about Christians trying to impose their moral beliefs on other people, is John 8:7.
Could be. HE attributed the paranoia to the pot. When he eased off, he said it went away.
THC, is fairly safe, particularly relative to other recreational drugs, but it does seem to be implicated in worsening predispositions to mental illnesses and has some long term effects on the brain. If it's abused, it can be addictive, and can cause problems in your work and personal lives.
He was specifically afraid of his mother catching him and doing something extreme. His mother, who was in the habit of lighting up with him.
Paranoia 1. Psychiatry . a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission. 2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.
Cocaine was first produced when it was perfectly legal. As was hashish. Caffeine pills are currently common, and perfectly legal.
You do have one valid point - black market drugs are more dangerous than they would otherwise be because they are unregulated and of wildly varying purity.
I tutored a guy who developed reasonably severe paranoia after heavy marijuana use.
THC is a psychoactive drug and just like any others it has potential negative side effects. Alcohol does too, of course, and some severe ones, but it's irresponsible and counterproductive to pretend THC doesn't have any. Anybody taking a drug, particularly a recreational one, should be aware of the possible negative side effects, make an informed decision, and use in moderation.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, actually, all the time. I have always been forbidden to use LaTex because supervisors want WYSIWYG and change tracking for editing. I see their point.
Word with proper use of cross references and styles works fine. You can type Tex into MathType for equations, or use LaTexIt (on a Mac). LaTexIt also works very nicely in PowerPoint or Keynote.
The only real problem with Word is that it's layout is buggy. Things don't stay where you put them. PowerPoint is a mess, but Keynote exports well enough for those backward conferences that don't support Macs.
I've tried a couple. They're all lacking features. Change tracking and reference management being big ones.
You said:
It is indeed something you find in typical high-entropy systems, including your own example. You also find it in the same bucket of air at lower temperatures, although if you lower the temperature enough and freeze out the gasses you will not find it.
Yes, depending on the level you look at you may or may not find chaotic behaviour. That doesn't mean the system isn't chaotic. Weather is unpredictable at the molecular level, is moderately predictable at the system level over a few days, and is quite predictable over longer terms (when it's called climate). Certain dynamic climate systems are also generally predictable over longer terms, like the el nino/nina, monsoon, etc.
The OP specifically mentioned strange attractors, which are involved in chaotic systems that exhibit chaotic features but settle towards a predictable state or set of states (the attractor), just like the bucket of air. Psychohistory was specifically described this way: individuals were completely unpredictable, the precise timeline was moderately predictable, and the outcome was almost inevitable.
Perhaps they make an expert system to help improve debating style? Don't tell me what my argument boils down to.
My argument boils down to this: battlefield medicine rarely involves "give the injured soldier this pill." Usually the intervention is a series of physical actions, many of which are nontrivial. A person trained to perform these actions is MUCH better at it than a person who is being "talked through" the process. In a modern army pretty much everyone is trained to put pressure on a wound. Battlefield medics do more than that. Battlefield surgeons do even more. You simply can't put untrained people in those roles and expect them to perform at the level of trained people, no matter how much expert system support they have. That goes for many other specialist tasks in modern armed forces as well, from infantry soldier (it helps if they can fire accurately) through mechanic to fighter pilot.
You might suggest that in the future we'll have robotics capable of performing any skilled task as well as a person. We might. But if we do, the story is still silly because we won't have people doing the fighting anyway. Technology simply can't eliminate the advantages to having specialized human combatants without at the same time eliminating the need to have human combatants.
That doesn't mean it's subsidized. Subsidized implies that Broadcom is paying for each Raspberry Pi, either through selling components at a loss or by giving cash to the foundation.
If you mean Broadcom gave the Raspberry Pi Foundation a deal on components that would normally only be available to bigger customers, I can believe that. Actually subsidizing each board? Doubt it.
Sure it is. The movement of any air molecule is chaotic. You can't predict it for very long. Only the statistical distribution is predictable.
From the description of psychohistory in the book, the description of the second empire as a strange attractor is not particularly good since the path the galaxy took towards it, as well as the endpoint, was accurately predictable.
All wars are economic wars.
Just about anyone can be talked through landing an airplane (poorly) given lots of time and ideal conditions. Now try it in a storm.
Battlefield medicine is a lot of manual dexterity and muscle memory. By the time some computer talks you through the first suture knot the patient is long dead. And ten or fifteen more behind him.
They also tend not to charge.
Every scientist who wants to be taken at all seriously. Preprint services are just online document aggregators. Anyone can put anything they want there. And no, a group ranking system won't fix that. Even fields that have preprint services STILL have journals.
Journals currently provide two essential services - they put their reputation behind their review and publication procedures, and they maintain archives. If bad papers get through, the journal's reputation suffers. They don't want that, so they have a vested interest in making sure bad papers don't get through.
At least they typeset it. Newer journals expect you to produce a publication ready PDF for them.
You find the concept "power" a bit tricky hey?
The summary is correct. YOU are confusing power and energy.
So rather than "Iceland actually totally fucked up at banking" what you meant to say was "some Icelandic banks totally fucked up and Icleand, unlike the rest of the world in a similar situation, DIDN'T fuck up."
Don't fool yourself. Any oxide is dangerous. Although your addiction to dihydrogen dioxide will usually be shorter.
A bunch of banks that happened to be in Iceland, but not backed by the government, made some promises they couldn't keep. A lot of people, mostly in the UK, fell for those promises, and when everything went belly up they demanded that the Icelanders make good on them, which would have essentially bankrupted the country. The Icelanders felt that wasn't fair, and had the wherewithal to tell the banks, the investors, and the countries that were backing them, to go to hell.
Precision is a measurable quantity. If something is "precise," it meets some arbitrary threshold of precision. That doesn't mean it can't be more precise.
Put another way, determine the precision of a measurement that is "precise." Now double the precision. Is the measurement "more precise?" Yes it is.
Ah, it's the medium not the message. I see. So reading to your kids, from your holy book purported to be the source of all morality, about how the only man who survived from Sodom and Gomorrah (saved personally by God) offered up his two virgin daughters to a violent crowd bent on rape to "do to them whatever you like" is okay, because it's written down and not a visual depiction?
I'm not distorting the comparison, much less again. That was you, remember? All I said was that the bible contained these things, and if you like, I can find an example of each one. You probably know where they are already though, or you would, if you'd read the bible. But you ARE again accusing me of things I didn't say. I didn't ever say I didn't like the bible. If you skip the boring bits, like the genealogies in Genesis, it's a pretty good read. Action packed, lots of sex and violence, moral ambiguity, characters who constantly fall prey to their pride, conceit or prejudice. Especially that God character.
There are even some good moral lessons in the bible. Lots of sound bites too. One of my favourites, appropriate here since we're talking (obliquely) about Christians trying to impose their moral beliefs on other people, is John 8:7.
Could be. HE attributed the paranoia to the pot. When he eased off, he said it went away.
THC, is fairly safe, particularly relative to other recreational drugs, but it does seem to be implicated in worsening predispositions to mental illnesses and has some long term effects on the brain. If it's abused, it can be addictive, and can cause problems in your work and personal lives.
He was specifically afraid of his mother catching him and doing something extreme. His mother, who was in the habit of lighting up with him.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paranoia?s=t&ld=1032
Yes. Even worse is "whoa, dude, try this, it's awesome... and there's no possible way it could hurt you in any way!"
"pounding a bottle of Jack and running 10K may have opposite effects on the body"
Actually, the effects are surprisingly similar. Both lead to puking in the bushes. Although after the run you feel better than if you hadn't run.
Cocaine was first produced when it was perfectly legal. As was hashish. Caffeine pills are currently common, and perfectly legal.
You do have one valid point - black market drugs are more dangerous than they would otherwise be because they are unregulated and of wildly varying purity.
I tutored a guy who developed reasonably severe paranoia after heavy marijuana use.
THC is a psychoactive drug and just like any others it has potential negative side effects. Alcohol does too, of course, and some severe ones, but it's irresponsible and counterproductive to pretend THC doesn't have any. Anybody taking a drug, particularly a recreational one, should be aware of the possible negative side effects, make an informed decision, and use in moderation.
Nonsense. It's dihydrogen oxide.
"Do you run around punching people who wear Bluetooth headsets in the ear?"
Do? No, not usually. Want to? Absolutely. Associate with them? Absolutely not.
IF Google glasses can be hidden, they MIGHT sell some. That's a pretty big IF though. At least in the near future.