The science-mag article says "the variation in the number of offspring—from zero to 17—indicates there was a large opportunity for selection to occur."
However, whether this "opportunity" resulted in any actual change is not mentioned. For example, if they found some feature change that correlated with the number of offspring, then you might say that is evidence that evolution is happening, but even only then if the correlation corresponds to some environmental pressures. Do they have statistics about traits at the beginning of their study period, and comparison with the statistics at the end?
Does the report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences have more details? Can't access it.
The title of the linked article is "Organic farming is rarely enough". But it is difficult to back up that "producing the bulk of the globe's diet will still require chemical fertilizers and pesticides", and so they simply skip that.
I think its fair to assume you use such a system when full rebuilds are not needed.
Such a system will work only with some software. For other software you would use a different system, or none at all. Software is just such a vast category.
The blog post is much longer, and there is much more analysis than real, meaningful, useful results. So many numbers and pretty graphs, but no conclusions: what is good, what should change, what is bad, what should not change.
Marian B. Pour-El found that even linear systems can have non-computable properties. See "The Wave Equation with Computable Initial Data Whose Unique Solution Is Nowhere Computable", Marian B. Pour-El, Ning Zhong, example link, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/malq.19970430406/abstract
Obviously there's a huge gap between NP-hard and non-computable.
On the other hand, one cannot even take it for granted that the Halting problem is not decidable. Toby Cubitt and colleagues probably assume a certain amount of metaphysics. I imagine they only claim NP-hardness as opposed to NP-completeness because they have no NP algorithm to show?
Let's put it the other way around. If you were to tell your browser you only want to visit websites that do not store your IP address, how far would you get?
Or, how tired would you get of pop-up's saying " This site stores your IP address. Continue viewing?"
The main content of a privacy policy is the following:
which information the server stores:
which kind of information is collected (identifying or not);
which particular information is collected (IP address, email address, name, etc.);
Kind of information??? As if the AI problems were all solved. IP Address? Of course it is collected. Email address? Yes if there is an input box that says email address then the address is collected.
The article says, "Last year, Florian Schießl, a LiMux project director, stated that he and his team had been naïve and had underestimated the extent of minor problems."
"naïve" links to another article on the same site, h-online.com, from March 2010,
but floschi.info just says "It works". The Internet Archive records only cover up to Feb 2010 (http://wayback.archive.org/web/20100501000000*/http://www.floschi.info)
Some people are better at this and some better at that. I couldn't find numbers mentioned in the scientist article, only that "Memory was worse", not how much worse, in whatever sense, for how many people, for which people, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the article does point out: "From the records they had, the researchers could not tell which traits were being selected for ..." http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/04/natural-selection-is-still-with-.html
This sentence already assumes the conclusion of the whole article, namely that *some* traits where in fact being selected for.
So kind of weak.
Thanks for pointing that out; had overlooked that for my reply.
However, it would be good to check with the original report.
The science-mag article says "the variation in the number of offspring—from zero to 17—indicates there was a large opportunity for selection to occur."
However, whether this "opportunity" resulted in any actual change is not mentioned. For example, if they found some feature change that correlated with the number of offspring, then you might say that is evidence that evolution is happening, but even only then if the correlation corresponds to some environmental pressures. Do they have statistics about traits at the beginning of their study period, and comparison with the statistics at the end?
Does the report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences have more details? Can't access it.
Fun: "The authors declare no conflict of interest." see http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/04/24/1118174109.abstract
S
The title of the linked article is "Organic farming is rarely enough". But it is difficult to back up that "producing the bulk of the globe's diet will still require chemical fertilizers and pesticides", and so they simply skip that.
Reference again, http://www.nature.com/news/organic-farming-is-rarely-enough-1.10519
S
I think its fair to assume you use such a system when full rebuilds are not needed.
Such a system will work only with some software. For other software you would use a different system, or none at all. Software is just such a vast category.
I've been using the frank gem with Ruby to see / explore effects of code changes in the browser.
The browser becomes a high-end output device (through frank's Auto-Refresh) for my text inputs.
Thanks sounds good. I don't quite see your list as being authoritative, however there seem to be cases where planning isn't required.
You have a pointer for "what first degree murder is"? I don't readily see a mismatch.
Is it already racism to make the charge only second - degree murder? What are the options?
"If the consumer association wins it's case,..." Doesn't sound like a big if.
Doesn't it also mean that it is very difficult to have a slow neutrino? You can hardly touch them and they're gone.
S
There is hope the problem with the digital locks can be avoided through simple boycotting. Don't buy, and there is no lock to bother with.
Wasn't it Kim Jong-il who invented DST?
S
Punitive damages, anyone?
Here's my tweet from a few days ago, "Do Americans not like government, because theirs is so bad? Cause or effect?" https://twitter.com/#!/stephanwehner/status/176761789281869824
S
The blog post is much longer, and there is much more analysis than real, meaningful, useful results. So many numbers and pretty graphs, but no conclusions: what is good, what should change, what is bad, what should not change.
S
With the analysis at
* http://elie.im/blog/security/how-we-broke-the-nucaptcha-video-scheme-and-what-we-propose-to-fix-it/
I find my own CAPTCHA is just as good, but at least you get to look at a nice cup of coffee:
* http://stephansmap.org/sign_up
Marian B. Pour-El found that even linear systems can have non-computable properties. See "The Wave Equation with Computable Initial Data Whose Unique Solution Is Nowhere Computable", Marian B. Pour-El, Ning Zhong, example link, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/malq.19970430406/abstract
Obviously there's a huge gap between NP-hard and non-computable.
On the other hand, one cannot even take it for granted that the Halting problem is not decidable. Toby Cubitt and colleagues probably assume a certain amount of metaphysics. I imagine they only claim NP-hardness as opposed to NP-completeness because they have no NP algorithm to show?
S
The file may be machine readable, but someone has to configure the other side, the client's preferences.
Here you will run into an overwhelming list of options that an average user is simply not going to bother with ---> Ridiculous waste of time.
Let's put it the other way around. If you were to tell your browser you only want to visit websites that do not store your IP address, how far would you get?
Or, how tired would you get of pop-up's saying " This site stores your IP address. Continue viewing?"
I think Google is being polite, as do people who quote a "lack of value"
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P3P
The main content of a privacy policy is the following:
which information the server stores:
which kind of information is collected (identifying or not);
which particular information is collected (IP address, email address, name, etc.);
Kind of information??? As if the AI problems were all solved. IP Address? Of course it is collected. Email address? Yes if there is an input box that says email address then the address is collected.
URL: http://activepolitic.com:82/News/2012-01-26d/EU_ACTA_chief_resigns_in_disgust_over_disrespect_at_citizens.html
Connection to 64.30.66.124 failed.
The system returned: (111) Connection refused
Here's some alternative, https://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/ACTA_rapporteur_denounces_ACTA_mascarade which quotes from Kader Arif's blog:
http://www.kader-arif.fr/actualites.php?actualite_id=147
The flip side of megaupload. Who knows which of the ~200 governments doesn't like what you do?
Odd, you mean Johns Hopkins ?! http://www.jhu.edu/
The article says, "Last year, Florian Schießl, a LiMux project director, stated that he and his team had been naïve and had underestimated the extent of minor problems."
"naïve" links to another article on the same site, h-online.com, from March 2010,
* LiMux project management, "We were naïve", http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/LiMux-project-management-We-were-naive-958824.html
This one states: On his blog, the IT expert admits that "We were naïve," and confesses to a "miscalculation".
This links to
* http://www.floschi.info/2010/03/quality-over-time-in-munich/
but floschi.info just says "It works". The Internet Archive records only cover up to Feb 2010 (http://wayback.archive.org/web/20100501000000*/http://www.floschi.info)
Some people are better at this and some better at that. I couldn't find numbers mentioned in the scientist article, only that "Memory was worse", not how much worse, in whatever sense, for how many people, for which people, etc.