Yep -- he bombed, in that room. But, I bet that a huge number of people watching at home laughed until almost puked. I thought it was the funniest thing I'd seen in a long while.
I pretty much agree with most of what you said except:
Why not have a flat income tax with the annual exemption equal to the U.S. poverty line?
Look at "Diminishing Marginal Utility of Income". Being in the upper 2% of all income earners in the U.S., I'm happy to be taxed at a higher rate, if it reduces the burden on those who don't do as well. If anything, I'd like to see taxes become cheaper at the bottom end, even if it means that I have to pay more.
Doing things right is ALWAYS the long term low cost option. Doing things right is seldom the short term low cost option. Management is short term. Guess what management is going to do. So, basically, management discounts future costs heavily. The reason that they do so is because, like peons such as myself, there's basically no job security. Have a bad quarter, get stabbed in the back in the board room/executive suite.
this will be them admiting wrong doing as well making it easier for a lawsuit.
Generally inadmissible in court. You see if an elevator company has a bunch of elevators fall then we, as a society, don't want to put in place rules that would mean that fixing the flaw immediately would be admissible as a confession in a court of law. To do so, it would, in effect, be putting the public at risk. So, generally the rules of evidence say that mitigating, repairing, and offers to settle are inadmissible to prove culpability.
So, attempts to prevent future harm are generally not admissible in court.
As a sibling pointed out, there's a scaling issue. But here's another problem. Dr's specialize. I've yet to see a portion of the "programmer" population that wasn't expected to do everything under the sun if asked. There are a few exception. DBA, etc. However, I can't even begin to count the number of times I've been told to do UI work after making it clear that I don't do UI work.
That and the issue of compensation, of course. A Dr. is much more likely to have his or her compensation scale with the number of patients treated. A programmer is much less likely to have that direct connection. This suggests that liability scale to customers but does not suggest that compensation should.
Wow, I was thinking that you were nuts for thinking 33728 was a fairly low slashdot id. Then I looked around. Within a few posts, I found id's over 900,000. I hadn't been paying attention, I guess.
Uncalled for. You are right. Uncalled for. You've just unjustly taken the brunt of years of pent up frustration towards (sometimes willful) math illiteracy
Another disconnect between Slashdotters and normal society is that Slashdotters think that your sort of retort is cool.
I wouldn't blame slashdotters. I would blame mathematicians. I'm going back, after about 17 years in software and studying math so I hang out with mathematicians a lot. Mathematicians generally are very kind and helpful towards those that try, no matter how much they struggle, but pretty tough and abrasive towards people who just can't be bothered. That attitude has rubbed off on me and I took you for the latter. Sorry about that.
It was a simple fucking mistake and I'm sure you've made them as well.
I think the last time was junior high. I think I got my ass handed to me by my algebra teacher. These days, I get my ass handed to me by instructors for other reasons.
Take the price you pay at retail and subtract the margin the retailer makes. For example, if Fry's makes 20%, multiply $600 by 0.8 to get $480.
Okay so Fry's adds 20% to their cost. That means that they take the cost $x$ and multiply it by 1.20 to get retail.. So, the retail cost $r$ is given by $r = 1.20*x$. Solving for $x$, you find that $x = r/1.20$. So, to undo this operation you must divide by 1.20 or, as you are trying to do multiply by 1/1.20 which is 0.83333.... not 0.80.
If you can't find an understanding of junior high math on a geek site like slashdot then things have gotten pretty bad. Contrary to what the general public things, it is *NOT* cool to me mathematically illiterate.
Q: So, what does the employed math Ph.D. say to the unemployed math Ph.D?
A: Paper or plastic.
---
If people could have a good career in math without having to get a Ph.D. then find a professorship someplace, you'd better bet people would be flocking to math.
De-emphasizing science and math isn't what's hurting us, it's the fact that science and math jobs aren't nearly as well-paid for the amount of education required as an MBA or a Law degree.
Startup it's pretty old at this point but I remember enjoying it. From the book, it's clear that he was comitted to Go.
So, characterizing him as "sounds like a person who bought the company to sue and make some serious cash on the curtails of other companies legit claims against Microsoft" seems off base. I would probably say that it sounds like a guy who's startup got crushed then he sold the smoldering remains to AT&T. AT&T sat on it for a few years then the guy found out that his startup was crushed partly by illegal means. So, he buys the remains back and trys to go get the guys who messed him over.
I'd say that there's nothing unsavory about that. I'd say that the unsavory is pretty much on Microsoft's end of the deal.
I don't think the dems had a desire to invade Iraq before Sept 11. So there would have been less interest in trying to link them to terrorism and therefore probably not a push to go into Iraq.
So, yes, the dems voted for it but I don't think they would have pursued Iraq, if in power.
The RealID was buried in a military appropriation bill. If the dems had voted against it then the R's could of held up that vote and said "They voted against getting body armor for our troops." Which would have been true, in a sense. I don't think the dems would have attached RealID onto a military spending bill.
The DCMA, I give you is a problem of money for both dems and reps.
I don't know enough about the SCOTUS decision to be able to speak intelligently about it.
I agree the dems and reps both aren't looking out for the small guy's best interest but to say that there's no difference seems a little loopy.
Yep, your right about that. In my blind rage against the "they're all the same" argument, I forgot to specify that, even though I mentioned reelection, that Gore wouldn't have gotten us into Iraq.
You and I are approximately the same age, so we've never seen the difference between legal and illegal abortion first hand. Roe V. Wade was 1972 -- the year before you were born and two years after I was born.
So, it seems that our intuitive sense of the situation probably isn't a valid basis for judgement.
The argument put forward in Freakonomics is that children brought up in poverty are more likely to commit crimes and women are remarkably good at deciding if they will be able to provide a good life for a child. Therefore, children who are likely to commit crimes are more likely to be aborted than children who are born into privileged circumstances.
That's it -- not my theory, just what's put forward in Freakonomics.
You said: It's a trick question! This doesn't describe an algorithm, which by definition, has a definite end. This process is theoretically unconstrained (constrained only practically, by the file size, making it trivial/useless)
So, by your definition, quicksort is not an algorithm because it doesn't have a definite end. (The number of iterations or recursive calls is limited only by available memory which, on a 64-bit machine with virtual memory is theoretically unconstrained.)
Then you said: (IANA CS graduate).
Trust me, you didn't need to clarify.
And finally: I am already employed. ^_^
It's good that you have a job. Hold on tight -- It's about the only hope you've got.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep -- he bombed, in that room. But, I bet that a huge number of people watching at home laughed until almost puked. I thought it was the funniest thing I'd seen in a long while.
We call that "The Ring of Fire".
I pretty much agree with most of what you said except:
Why not have a flat income tax with the annual exemption equal to the U.S. poverty line?
Look at "Diminishing Marginal Utility of Income". Being in the upper 2% of all income earners in the U.S., I'm happy to be taxed at a higher rate, if it reduces the burden on those who don't do as well. If anything, I'd like to see taxes become cheaper at the bottom end, even if it means that I have to pay more.
Gorram it.
Doing things right is ALWAYS the long term low cost option. Doing things right is seldom the short term low cost option. Management is short term. Guess what management is going to do.
So, basically, management discounts future costs heavily. The reason that they do so is because, like peons such as myself, there's basically no job security. Have a bad quarter, get stabbed in the back in the board room/executive suite.
Is it any surprise that people act this way?
this will be them admiting wrong doing as well making it easier for a lawsuit.
Generally inadmissible in court. You see if an elevator company has a bunch of elevators fall then we, as a society, don't want to put in place rules that would mean that fixing the flaw immediately would be admissible as a confession in a court of law. To do so, it would, in effect, be putting the public at risk. So, generally the rules of evidence say that mitigating, repairing, and offers to settle are inadmissible to prove culpability.
So, attempts to prevent future harm are generally not admissible in court.
As a sibling pointed out, there's a scaling issue. But here's another problem. Dr's specialize. I've yet to see a portion of the "programmer" population that wasn't expected to do everything under the sun if asked. There are a few exception. DBA, etc. However, I can't even begin to count the number of times I've been told to do UI work after making it clear that I don't do UI work.
That and the issue of compensation, of course. A Dr. is much more likely to have his or her compensation scale with the number of patients treated. A programmer is much less likely to have that direct connection. This suggests that liability scale to customers but does not suggest that compensation should.
There's some guy who bought a beta-tester UID off of ebay. I think it's like 47.
Wow, I was thinking that you were nuts for thinking 33728 was a fairly low slashdot id. Then I looked around. Within a few posts, I found id's over 900,000. I hadn't been paying attention, I guess.
Uncalled for.
You are right. Uncalled for. You've just unjustly taken the brunt of years of pent up frustration towards (sometimes willful) math illiteracy
Another disconnect between Slashdotters and normal society is that Slashdotters think that your sort of retort is cool.
I wouldn't blame slashdotters. I would blame mathematicians. I'm going back, after about 17 years in software and studying math so I hang out with mathematicians a lot. Mathematicians generally are very kind and helpful towards those that try, no matter how much they struggle, but pretty tough and abrasive towards people who just can't be bothered. That attitude has rubbed off on me and I took you for the latter. Sorry about that.
It was a simple fucking mistake and I'm sure you've made them as well.
I think the last time was junior high. I think I got my ass handed to me by my algebra teacher. These days, I get my ass handed to me by instructors for other reasons.
And I apparently fail grade school spelling. ;-)
Take the price you pay at retail and subtract the margin the retailer makes. For example, if Fry's makes 20%, multiply $600 by 0.8 to get $480.
Okay so Fry's adds 20% to their cost. That means that they take the cost $x$ and multiply it by 1.20 to get retail.. So, the retail cost $r$ is given by $r = 1.20*x$. Solving for $x$, you find that $x = r/1.20$. So, to undo this operation you must divide by 1.20 or, as you are trying to do multiply by 1/1.20 which is 0.83333.... not 0.80.
If you can't find an understanding of junior high math on a geek site like slashdot then things have gotten pretty bad. Contrary to what the general public things, it is *NOT* cool to me mathematically illiterate.
http://www.businessrecord.com/Main.asp?SectionID=1 &SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=2130
It's getting better.
people living there will begin to realize they are worth more then the $5,000 ...
A deep and shocking misunderstanding of Economics this is. -- Yoda Greenspan.
This is the paper that you want to make heads or tails out of monads.
s /marktoberdorf/
http://research.microsoft.com/Users/simonpj/paper
Q: So, what does the employed math Ph.D. say to the unemployed math Ph.D?
A: Paper or plastic.
---
If people could have a good career in math without having to get a Ph.D. then find a professorship someplace, you'd better bet people would be flocking to math.
De-emphasizing science and math isn't what's hurting us, it's the fact that science and math jobs aren't nearly as well-paid for the amount of education required as an MBA or a Law degree.
I took a little Spanish and I don't get it. None of the "conjugations" of customizer as a subject results in "sodomizer".
You might also consider reading his book.
Startup it's pretty old at this point but I remember enjoying it. From the book, it's clear that he was comitted to Go.
So, characterizing him as "sounds like a person who bought the company to sue and make some serious cash on the curtails of other companies legit claims against Microsoft" seems off base. I would probably say that it sounds like a guy who's startup got crushed then he sold the smoldering remains to AT&T. AT&T sat on it for a few years then the guy found out that his startup was crushed partly by illegal means. So, he buys the remains back and trys to go get the guys who messed him over.
I'd say that there's nothing unsavory about that. I'd say that the unsavory is pretty much on Microsoft's end of the deal.
I don't think the dems had a desire to invade Iraq before Sept 11. So there would have been less interest in trying to link them to terrorism and therefore probably not a push to go into Iraq.
So, yes, the dems voted for it but I don't think they would have pursued Iraq, if in power.
The RealID was buried in a military appropriation bill. If the dems had voted against it then the R's could of held up that vote and said "They voted against getting body armor for our troops." Which would have been true, in a sense. I don't think the dems would have attached RealID onto a military spending bill.
The DCMA, I give you is a problem of money for both dems and reps.
I don't know enough about the SCOTUS decision to be able to speak intelligently about it.
I agree the dems and reps both aren't looking out for the small guy's best interest but to say that there's no difference seems a little loopy.
Yep, your right about that. In my blind rage against the "they're all the same" argument, I forgot to specify that, even though I mentioned reelection, that Gore wouldn't have gotten us into Iraq.
Jane, you ignorant slut!
WTF, this is the sort of ignorant crap that got GWB reelected. Do you honestly think that we'd be in Iraq with a dem?
Do you think we'd be fearing the overturn of Roe V. Wade.
Do you think we'd be running the deficits that we are?
WTF! If I could reach out through the internet and whack yoiu upside the head, I certainly would.
Yep.
FYI my coworker thought it was insisting it was O(log n)
You and I are approximately the same age, so we've never seen the difference between legal and illegal abortion first hand. Roe V. Wade was 1972 -- the year before you were born and two years after I was born.
So, it seems that our intuitive sense of the situation probably isn't a valid basis for judgement.
The argument put forward in Freakonomics is that children brought up in poverty are more likely to commit crimes and women are remarkably good at deciding if they will be able to provide a good life for a child. Therefore, children who are likely to commit crimes are more likely to be aborted than children who are born into privileged circumstances.
That's it -- not my theory, just what's put forward in Freakonomics.
You said:
It's a trick question! This doesn't describe an algorithm, which by definition, has a definite end. This process is theoretically unconstrained (constrained only practically, by the file size, making it trivial/useless)
So, by your definition, quicksort is not an algorithm because it doesn't have a definite end. (The number of iterations or recursive calls is limited only by available memory which, on a 64-bit machine with virtual memory is theoretically unconstrained.)
Then you said:
(IANA CS graduate).
Trust me, you didn't need to clarify.
And finally:
I am already employed. ^_^
It's good that you have a job. Hold on tight -- It's about the only hope you've got.