Think about the concept of hierarchy, that at each level there are fewer people than the level below. Unless you are exceptional and explicitly make known your intention to move up in the company, you should not expect a real promotion (i.e. more than moving from junior XX to unprefixed XX) for half your career: 20 years.
The cool thing about race is that there is no science behind any of it
It's one thing to denigrate overgeneralizations or outright lies, it's quite another to deny that there are clearly evident statistical properties of groups of people that we have identified with the term "race".
There is a critical difference between advocating for the legality of something and advocating for that thing. I think that abortion is (often, not always) a bad thing which should be legal. I think prostitution is a bad thing which should be legal. I think wasting electricity is a bad thing which should be legal.
It is even possible to prove the nonexistence of something with only a single property... such as the existence of a number that is equivalent to itself plus 1. There is absolutely no number, in any number system defined by mathematics, that satisfies this criteria.
Therefor, the system of numbers modulo 1 doesn't exist.
Naturally evolved poisonous plants can propagate themselves. There are plants - celery is an example - that produce poison if stressed enough while growing. Just because it's familiar (tapioca) doesn't mean it's not deadly (cassava).
The sentence is ambiguous, but if you apply naturally as an adverb modifying built, and man-made as an adjective modifying pesticide, it isn't self-contradictory.
The first transistor was invented about 1925 by Lilienfeld. Ironically, it was a field effect transistor, the type that gets most use in digital devices today. Point contact transistors were developed at Bell Labs in the 1940s, and bipolar transistors at Bell Labs in 1950.
8 bit (monolithic) processors were developed as an improvement on 4 bit processors. At the time that 8 bit processors were new, a single chip 16 bit CPU would have been nearly impossible (due to, among other things, low yield).
In those days, ICs were still laid out by hand, using sticky colored plastic on a clear, dimensionally stable plastic background. Those were the days when a company would occasionally "lose" a process: be unable to produce a chip, or a whole family of chips, because something mysterious went wrong in the factory.
The CPU that in 1975 would have represented man-years of development can be today taken from idea to a design ready to be sent to a foundry in a day. If you're in a hurry, you can make it that day with a programmable device. Progress, indeed.
The limiting factor was RAM. 64 kbits cost $10 in 1980. A 640x480 bit-mapped display 8 bits deep required $400 worth of RAM, a non-trivial fraction of the total system cost.
Nothing but management shortsightedness prevented Xerox from developing and selling a $2k computer with mouse and GUI before anyone else. Xerox had the money and technology that could have made them into the equivalent of what Microsoft plus IBM are today. Xerox management didn't have the vision.
Everyone in a for-profit company has a responsibility to do things that at the very least have the potential and intention of leading to a profit; otherwise they are defrauding the owners. That includes researchers. It may not be the responsibility of researchers to develop a product (the fields overlap), but it's their responsibility not to waste the company's money and their own lives. If the research does not lead to a product, that waste is precisely what happens.
Part of the reason is safety margin. Another part is test vector coverage: a user's stability testing may not cover that single instruction with that worst case data pattern that fails. Yet another part is operating condition: Intel guarantees the chip to operate at maximum temperature at a given voltage less a specified tolerance; the owner can boost speed by boosting voltage and lowering temperature. A fourth part is the complex game of maximizing profit: not all the top speed chips can actually be sold at a premium price, so it's better to sell them at a lower price and a downrgraded label than not to sell them at all.
One problem with ambiguous language, which you seem to support, is legal. In principle, a person could be hanged for answering "yes" to the question "Didn't you murder that woman?", which literally means "Did you not murder that woman?" instead of the colloquial "Did you murder that woman?" Or maybe that person could be hanged for answering "no". Rest assured that the prosecution will strive to distort your answer.
The R in question is the sum of the wiring resistance and the resistance of the transistors in conduction. Since switching time is inversely proportional to resistance, resistance drops out of the equation. (The only way around this is inductors, which are not practical.) Internal resistance cannot be neglected, because it is essential to the actual loss mechanism.
Reliability varies more by model than by brand. Seagate is a bit worse than WD overall, but the real loser is Hitachi. Claiming that Seagate is dramatically bad is unjustified.
Doctors are overpaid, drugs are criminally expensive and insurance is garbage all because a bunch of assholes in the 1% whined about universal healthcare. We hate the poor and working class here in the USA so we make sure that proper medical care is out of reach.
Look here, you goddamned thief. You have no right to the money I've earned. You're so cowardly, you won't even steal it yourself, you have the government do it for you. Healthcare is not a right. You have no right to live on the efforts of others.
Have you bothered to read the Koran? It is the definitional foundation of Islam, and it declares all people who aren't Muslims to be the enemy, fit only to be killed, enslaved, or converted.
Unique among major religions, Islam is inextricably militaristic. As long as Muslims and non-Muslims exist, Islam is incompatible with civilization. Long term, only one can survive.
I read "God Is Not Great". It included a many gratuitous nasty insults. Many of his arguments were peculiar at best.
I am a positive atheist; I deny mysticism of all varieties. I think religion does terrible damage to all believers and cripples humanity. But I don't write books where my strongest, most vicious statements are unsupported by any argument whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
Think about the concept of hierarchy, that at each level there are fewer people than the level below. Unless you are exceptional and explicitly make known your intention to move up in the company, you should not expect a real promotion (i.e. more than moving from junior XX to unprefixed XX) for half your career: 20 years.
It's one thing to denigrate overgeneralizations or outright lies, it's quite another to deny that there are clearly evident statistical properties of groups of people that we have identified with the term "race".
So there's no such thing as ... " Good Gravy! "
There is a critical difference between advocating for the legality of something and advocating for that thing. I think that abortion is (often, not always) a bad thing which should be legal. I think prostitution is a bad thing which should be legal. I think wasting electricity is a bad thing which should be legal.
Therefor, the system of numbers modulo 1 doesn't exist.
Naturally evolved poisonous plants can propagate themselves. There are plants - celery is an example - that produce poison if stressed enough while growing. Just because it's familiar (tapioca) doesn't mean it's not deadly (cassava).
I lost my modpoints today, otherwise you'd gain a "Funny".
Wait until the patent expires. Problem solved.
Wow, context-dropping, changing the subject, using different definitions of the same word. No wonder modern philosophy has such widespread respect.
The sentence is ambiguous, but if you apply naturally as an adverb modifying built, and man-made as an adjective modifying pesticide, it isn't self-contradictory.
Oh, the options
___by what standard?
___starting with you
___too many fools, not too many people
___and you will solve this problem how?
The first transistor was invented about 1925 by Lilienfeld. Ironically, it was a field effect transistor, the type that gets most use in digital devices today. Point contact transistors were developed at Bell Labs in the 1940s, and bipolar transistors at Bell Labs in 1950.
8 bit (monolithic) processors were developed as an improvement on 4 bit processors. At the time that 8 bit processors were new, a single chip 16 bit CPU would have been nearly impossible (due to, among other things, low yield).
In those days, ICs were still laid out by hand, using sticky colored plastic on a clear, dimensionally stable plastic background. Those were the days when a company would occasionally "lose" a process: be unable to produce a chip, or a whole family of chips, because something mysterious went wrong in the factory.
The CPU that in 1975 would have represented man-years of development can be today taken from idea to a design ready to be sent to a foundry in a day. If you're in a hurry, you can make it that day with a programmable device. Progress, indeed.
The limiting factor was RAM. 64 kbits cost $10 in 1980. A 640x480 bit-mapped display 8 bits deep required $400 worth of RAM, a non-trivial fraction of the total system cost.
Nothing but management shortsightedness prevented Xerox from developing and selling a $2k computer with mouse and GUI before anyone else. Xerox had the money and technology that could have made them into the equivalent of what Microsoft plus IBM are today. Xerox management didn't have the vision.
Everyone in a for-profit company has a responsibility to do things that at the very least have the potential and intention of leading to a profit; otherwise they are defrauding the owners. That includes researchers. It may not be the responsibility of researchers to develop a product (the fields overlap), but it's their responsibility not to waste the company's money and their own lives. If the research does not lead to a product, that waste is precisely what happens.
Part of the reason is safety margin. Another part is test vector coverage: a user's stability testing may not cover that single instruction with that worst case data pattern that fails. Yet another part is operating condition: Intel guarantees the chip to operate at maximum temperature at a given voltage less a specified tolerance; the owner can boost speed by boosting voltage and lowering temperature. A fourth part is the complex game of maximizing profit: not all the top speed chips can actually be sold at a premium price, so it's better to sell them at a lower price and a downrgraded label than not to sell them at all.
One problem with ambiguous language, which you seem to support, is legal. In principle, a person could be hanged for answering "yes" to the question "Didn't you murder that woman?", which literally means "Did you not murder that woman?" instead of the colloquial "Did you murder that woman?" Or maybe that person could be hanged for answering "no". Rest assured that the prosecution will strive to distort your answer.
The R in question is the sum of the wiring resistance and the resistance of the transistors in conduction. Since switching time is inversely proportional to resistance, resistance drops out of the equation. (The only way around this is inductors, which are not practical.) Internal resistance cannot be neglected, because it is essential to the actual loss mechanism.
Reliability varies more by model than by brand. Seagate is a bit worse than WD overall, but the real loser is Hitachi. Claiming that Seagate is dramatically bad is unjustified.
Look here, you goddamned thief. You have no right to the money I've earned. You're so cowardly, you won't even steal it yourself, you have the government do it for you. Healthcare is not a right. You have no right to live on the efforts of others.
"Right makes Might" is a good principle, but doesn't always work out. Consider, for example, the Peloponnesian War.
Have you bothered to read the Koran? It is the definitional foundation of Islam, and it declares all people who aren't Muslims to be the enemy, fit only to be killed, enslaved, or converted.
Unique among major religions, Islam is inextricably militaristic. As long as Muslims and non-Muslims exist, Islam is incompatible with civilization. Long term, only one can survive.
The biblical injunctions against witchcraft are due to mistranslation, and in particular should not be confused with the meaning of witchcraft as understood for the last few hundred years. http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/religion/artikel.php?ID=198322
I read "God Is Not Great". It included a many gratuitous nasty insults. Many of his arguments were peculiar at best.
I am a positive atheist; I deny mysticism of all varieties. I think religion does terrible damage to all believers and cripples humanity. But I don't write books where my strongest, most vicious statements are unsupported by any argument whatsoever.