They don't make a profit. But of course if they didn't have other revenue streams then the UK taxpayers (of whom i am one) would have to provide more money to allow the galleries to provide the same level of services.
There are alternatives of course: they could provide reduced services (eg smaller digitisation programmes, reduced opening hours) or we in the UK could make it explicit that the taxpayer funded museums had provide stuff like this for free and up our tax contributions. Personally, I'm in favour of this latter option, but I suspect I'm in the minority.
On this topic, Americans need to learn that there's more than one way to do it. Just cos your state funded services provide all their stuff in the public domain doesn't mean that it is the only way. In the UK we usually go for a mixture of taxes and cost-recovery to fund these institutions. It does at least have the benefits of allowing high-quality services for less tax.
Have you got any evidence for your statement that the corrective optics only recover a fraction of the light gathering capacity. I've never heard this and looking at various websites hasn't shown this. I assume the COSTAR corrective optics must have caused some light loss for the instruments that required it, but Hubble hasn't exactly been a disappointment in terms of results. And of course, some of the most successful instruments (WFPC2, ACS, STIS) haven't required the corrective optics and so haven't had suffered any light gathering capacity at all. There's loads of information on the NASA website at the moment about Hubble, including a video with the designers of WFPC2. This was always designed with an internal mirror, and when they discovered the spherical aberration they simply ground this mirror to an alternative shape. Therefore, no loss of light.
And what is this about getting a 'visible light replacement space telescope'? Since when has anyone planned a replacement visible light space telescope? NASA are certainly not doing it, so who is? The James Webb Space Telescope which is always reported as the 'Hubble Replacement' is an infra-red telescope, which makes sense as visible light ground-based telescopes have improved so much it is probably not worth the cost of sending another space telescope up to look at visible light. Of course, ground-based telescopes can't use fancy tricks to see radiation that gets blocked by the atmosphere, which is why we need the JWST.
So now I need software to unformat the drive and recover the data. It does this by analyzing the data, my private data.
It doesn't analyse the data. Unformatting a hard drive doesn't appear to be covered by any of the clauses above. Actually doing the unformatting merely restores links to your data files: no unformatting program I know of actually cares what is in the files.
You wouldn't use a different unformat for MP3 as you would for JPEGs. Therefore it is not analysing your data.
I would have thought that the train would benefit from short/medium routes, rather than long distance. Planes will be faster once in the air, and where the train wins is in avoiding the delays of boarding/security checks etc.
But the point they were trying to make is that the statistics aren't valid. The guys writing the paper were measuring independent random events. Baseball hits may or may not be random, but the key thing is that they are not independent.
Players suffer from pressure because of streaks. A player who goes several games without hitting is under a huge amount of pressure to hit, and their form may suffer. A player who hits for a few games is likely to have high confidence and keep hitting. However, if they do keep hitting for a few games more, everyone starts talking about it. They get asked questions at interviews etc. Many players crack under that sort of extra pressure. Di Maggio's great streak is great because he overcame that. Sportsmen in all sorts of sports are heard to make comments such as, "I'm just focussing on hitting/scoring" or "I'm taking one game at a time". This is because they're trying to avoid that sort of pressure.
I'm sure the guys who wrote the article know about gamblers' fallacy and would be quick to point out someone's mistake. Eg the gambler who bets extra money on a six being rolled because no six has come up on the last 20 rolls and 'a six must be due'. Of course, a six is no more likely than it was on any other roll because each roll is random and independent of any other roll. In the case of sporting streaks, each game is not independent, so the argument is just and flawed and invalid as the gamblers' fallacy.
Am I to take it that this means Virgin Media will be injecting Ads into Slashdot (for instance)? Apart from the obvious privacy issues, unless their algorithm is extremely clever, surly this is going to break a lot of pages?
No. What will happen is that Virgin Media will monitor your visit to Slashdot and include that in your profile. Any sites which sign up to serve Phorm adverts will be including adverts to you based on your profile.
My BS was Computer Science and then I became a librarian. That seems to be a fairly rare combination around my area (UK). Then I hear of another one on Slashdot! And it's a she!!! Err, does she have any friends, btw?:) (Preferably ones who'd choose vim;)
I'd agree with most of this, expanding 'runs through the night' to 'runs where it is impossible to use public transport'.
However, I'm not sure about 'It costs less than the cost of public transport'. If you already have a car/automobile then there is a good chance that a given journey will be cheaper than public transport - especially if more than one person is making the journey. However, my experience in the UK suggests that if you book plane/train far enough in advance you can often get prices cheaper than a car journey (especially considering fuel prices over here.)
If you don't need a car, then doing without one entirely is almost certainly going to be cheaper. I don't have a car and spend probably 600 to 800 GB pounds a year on public transport (excluding any long distance holiday flights for which I wouldn't use a car). Given that I couldn't repair a car myself, I doubt that I could run a car for this (when you include fuel, wear and tear, insurance, tax, MOT, depreciation, interest on a loan etc).
Being able to take a few steps to catch a ball means your brain is hardwired for pretty heavy math.
I've often wondered about this: does the brain do heavy maths or is it some simpler set of rules? Given that it would be very difficult/impossible to make accurate guesses at the mass, starting velocity, effect of wind/rotation etc. I can't really see how the brain would be performing complex ballistic equations in the split second it takes to make judgements about these matters.
Given that we can reasonable estimates of change in angle (because of the direction we are looking when we focus on an object) and change of distance (with stereoscopic vision) I would have thought rules such as 'move to the right', 'move back' etc were more likely. In effect we are performing a mathematical process, but it is rather different from the sort we get taught in maths/physics at school. Watching fielders attempt to catch balls in cricket and baseball (the way they start moving and then constantly refine their position until they are under the ball) I think this is more likely.
If anyone who thinks differently wants to respond, I'd be interested in hearing your arguments.
I disagree. The point is the mutations are random and as the GP said there is a selection that TENDS to favour certain selections. You say that it is not the main mechanism. What do you think is the main mechanism? You vaguely say it is a lot more complex. In what ways?
I've often wondered about this as well. I suspect the answer may lie in your phrase 'known history', i.e. we have a written record of what people have done in the past, what they've thought about, discoveries they've made and information they have wanted to hand down to future generations.
For a lot of the time, human groups would have been isolated and spent all their time struggling to survive. With developments like agriculture it allowed people to live together in much bigger groups, share ideas and, with the development of writing, record those ideas for posterity. Looking at it like that, it seems to me less surprising that there has been an explosion of creativity and technological development in the last 5 to 10 thousand years.
You are, of course, presuming that Asimov was doing more than writing good FICTION.
Not only that, but in one of his later essays he discusses why the later Foundation novels look towards an alternative to psychohistory ('Gaia'). I can't remember all the details, but Asimov felt that chaos was one of the biggest reasons why it would fail (along with the problems of finding alien species from outside the Galaxy).
I'm not sure about whether Craig Murray has a relationship to Arsenal or not, but he got involved in it originally by being British ambassador to Uzbekistan. When he was there he had citizens coming to the embassy complaining of friends/relations who had 'disappeared' or been tortured. When he protested to the British Government that we appeared to be approving and supporting a regime which tortured people, their response was to sack him.
I think it is the fact that 'Have I got news for you' is a programme that gets it humour from what is reported in the news. Therefore, it someone else has reported it, then it has been alleged.
But it is tricky. I'm not very familiar with the American market, but in the UK the biggest cable provider is Virgin Media. Recently Sky (part of the UK outpost of the Murdoch empire) changed its deal on the channels it offered to Virgin. Basically they hiked the price and offered some extra free channels hardly anyone was interested in. Virgin said, "we don't like this - our customers don't want to pay for a bunch of crap channels". Sky said, "OK - don't take them".
The reason Sky can do this, of course, is that Murdoch is a wily old dog and not only offers content, but distributes it through the Sky satellite network. Not surprisingly a couple of days after Virgin lost Sky prime content, huge billboards went up saying "Virgin customers have lost X programme and Y programme - switch to Sky!"
The whole problem has caused big problems for Virgin Media and rumours of takeovers etc are around.
Anyhoo, point being is that cable companies can get shafted harder than the customers if they DON'T sign some of these contracts.
ISBNs can't be copyrighted in themselves, but the cover of a game can. If you take a picture of one, the store can throw you out and whoever owns the copyright to the game cover could sue.
When I first saw the image I thought they were bubbles too. After reading your post I flipped the image 180 degrees and they were revealed as craters. Just goes to show how much our brains are wired to see light coming from the top...
Anyway, I suspect the dark stains are probably not caves as when you enlarge the image you can see wisps of the white material on the dark stuff. It would be interesting to know if it was the dark material that caused the craters or whether whatever caused the craters revealed the dark material under the white surface.
I can only comment on the situation in the UK, but as one person has already replied, there are very specific legal exceptions for libraries (whether public or academic). In the UK, photocopying is usually more expensive in a library because we have to pay a small amount per sheet to the Copyright Licencing Agency to cover the possibility that people are making photocopies that are not covered by fair use.
If you don't pay they will audit you and you know that they will catch people and then you're in deep doodoo.
Slashdot Mirror
They don't make a profit. But of course if they didn't have other revenue streams then the UK taxpayers (of whom i am one) would have to provide more money to allow the galleries to provide the same level of services.
There are alternatives of course: they could provide reduced services (eg smaller digitisation programmes, reduced opening hours) or we in the UK could make it explicit that the taxpayer funded museums had provide stuff like this for free and up our tax contributions. Personally, I'm in favour of this latter option, but I suspect I'm in the minority.
On this topic, Americans need to learn that there's more than one way to do it. Just cos your state funded services provide all their stuff in the public domain doesn't mean that it is the only way. In the UK we usually go for a mixture of taxes and cost-recovery to fund these institutions. It does at least have the benefits of allowing high-quality services for less tax.
Have you got any evidence for your statement that the corrective optics only recover a fraction of the light gathering capacity. I've never heard this and looking at various websites hasn't shown this. I assume the COSTAR corrective optics must have caused some light loss for the instruments that required it, but Hubble hasn't exactly been a disappointment in terms of results. And of course, some of the most successful instruments (WFPC2, ACS, STIS) haven't required the corrective optics and so haven't had suffered any light gathering capacity at all. There's loads of information on the NASA website at the moment about Hubble, including a video with the designers of WFPC2. This was always designed with an internal mirror, and when they discovered the spherical aberration they simply ground this mirror to an alternative shape. Therefore, no loss of light.
And what is this about getting a 'visible light replacement space telescope'? Since when has anyone planned a replacement visible light space telescope? NASA are certainly not doing it, so who is? The James Webb Space Telescope which is always reported as the 'Hubble Replacement' is an infra-red telescope, which makes sense as visible light ground-based telescopes have improved so much it is probably not worth the cost of sending another space telescope up to look at visible light. Of course, ground-based telescopes can't use fancy tricks to see radiation that gets blocked by the atmosphere, which is why we need the JWST.
After a serious crash he was asked what went through his mind at the time. He replied, "My arse."
It doesn't analyse the data. Unformatting a hard drive doesn't appear to be covered by any of the clauses above. Actually doing the unformatting merely restores links to your data files: no unformatting program I know of actually cares what is in the files.
You wouldn't use a different unformat for MP3 as you would for JPEGs. Therefore it is not analysing your data.
I would have thought that the train would benefit from short/medium routes, rather than long distance. Planes will be faster once in the air, and where the train wins is in avoiding the delays of boarding/security checks etc.
The DPA does not apply to CCTV. CCTV information is simply in a recording in chronological order - it has no filing system based on an individual. See http://www.ico.gov.uk/Home/what_we_cover/data_protection/guidance/technical_guidance_notes.aspx If there was some way of accessing the information by name or a number that could identify an individual then it would be covered.
But the point they were trying to make is that the statistics aren't valid. The guys writing the paper were measuring independent random events. Baseball hits may or may not be random, but the key thing is that they are not independent.
Players suffer from pressure because of streaks. A player who goes several games without hitting is under a huge amount of pressure to hit, and their form may suffer. A player who hits for a few games is likely to have high confidence and keep hitting. However, if they do keep hitting for a few games more, everyone starts talking about it. They get asked questions at interviews etc. Many players crack under that sort of extra pressure. Di Maggio's great streak is great because he overcame that. Sportsmen in all sorts of sports are heard to make comments such as, "I'm just focussing on hitting/scoring" or "I'm taking one game at a time". This is because they're trying to avoid that sort of pressure.
I'm sure the guys who wrote the article know about gamblers' fallacy and would be quick to point out someone's mistake. Eg the gambler who bets extra money on a six being rolled because no six has come up on the last 20 rolls and 'a six must be due'. Of course, a six is no more likely than it was on any other roll because each roll is random and independent of any other roll. In the case of sporting streaks, each game is not independent, so the argument is just and flawed and invalid as the gamblers' fallacy.
My BS was Computer Science and then I became a librarian. That seems to be a fairly rare combination around my area (UK). Then I hear of another one on Slashdot! And it's a she!!! Err, does she have any friends, btw? :) (Preferably ones who'd choose vim ;)
Bravo! A fine solution to the problem :)
However, I'm not sure about 'It costs less than the cost of public transport'. If you already have a car/automobile then there is a good chance that a given journey will be cheaper than public transport - especially if more than one person is making the journey. However, my experience in the UK suggests that if you book plane/train far enough in advance you can often get prices cheaper than a car journey (especially considering fuel prices over here.)
If you don't need a car, then doing without one entirely is almost certainly going to be cheaper. I don't have a car and spend probably 600 to 800 GB pounds a year on public transport (excluding any long distance holiday flights for which I wouldn't use a car). Given that I couldn't repair a car myself, I doubt that I could run a car for this (when you include fuel, wear and tear, insurance, tax, MOT, depreciation, interest on a loan etc).
I've often wondered about this: does the brain do heavy maths or is it some simpler set of rules? Given that it would be very difficult/impossible to make accurate guesses at the mass, starting velocity, effect of wind/rotation etc. I can't really see how the brain would be performing complex ballistic equations in the split second it takes to make judgements about these matters.
Given that we can reasonable estimates of change in angle (because of the direction we are looking when we focus on an object) and change of distance (with stereoscopic vision) I would have thought rules such as 'move to the right', 'move back' etc were more likely. In effect we are performing a mathematical process, but it is rather different from the sort we get taught in maths/physics at school. Watching fielders attempt to catch balls in cricket and baseball (the way they start moving and then constantly refine their position until they are under the ball) I think this is more likely.
If anyone who thinks differently wants to respond, I'd be interested in hearing your arguments.
I disagree. The point is the mutations are random and as the GP said there is a selection that TENDS to favour certain selections. You say that it is not the main mechanism. What do you think is the main mechanism? You vaguely say it is a lot more complex. In what ways?
For a lot of the time, human groups would have been isolated and spent all their time struggling to survive. With developments like agriculture it allowed people to live together in much bigger groups, share ideas and, with the development of writing, record those ideas for posterity. Looking at it like that, it seems to me less surprising that there has been an explosion of creativity and technological development in the last 5 to 10 thousand years.
That appears to happen to Earthly wire transfers now - at least that was my bank manager's excuse...
They're even less likely to be awarded in the years before the work happened though...
I'm not sure about whether Craig Murray has a relationship to Arsenal or not, but he got involved in it originally by being British ambassador to Uzbekistan. When he was there he had citizens coming to the embassy complaining of friends/relations who had 'disappeared' or been tortured. When he protested to the British Government that we appeared to be approving and supporting a regime which tortured people, their response was to sack him.
I think it is the fact that 'Have I got news for you' is a programme that gets it humour from what is reported in the news. Therefore, it someone else has reported it, then it has been alleged.
The reason Sky can do this, of course, is that Murdoch is a wily old dog and not only offers content, but distributes it through the Sky satellite network. Not surprisingly a couple of days after Virgin lost Sky prime content, huge billboards went up saying "Virgin customers have lost X programme and Y programme - switch to Sky!"
The whole problem has caused big problems for Virgin Media and rumours of takeovers etc are around.
Anyhoo, point being is that cable companies can get shafted harder than the customers if they DON'T sign some of these contracts.
ISBNs can't be copyrighted in themselves, but the cover of a game can. If you take a picture of one, the store can throw you out and whoever owns the copyright to the game cover could sue.
Except that they've measured for radiation and didn't find any.
Anyway, I suspect the dark stains are probably not caves as when you enlarge the image you can see wisps of the white material on the dark stuff. It would be interesting to know if it was the dark material that caused the craters or whether whatever caused the craters revealed the dark material under the white surface.
and cows still need milking on a Sunday...
If you don't pay they will audit you and you know that they will catch people and then you're in deep doodoo.